MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403745654 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2343

Hydrodynamic simulations of white dwarf–white dwarf mergers and the origin of R Coronae Borealis stars

2024· article· en· W4403745654 on OpenAlexaff
Sagiv Shiber, Orsola De Marco, Patrick M. Motl, Bradley Munson, Dominic Marcello, Juhan Frank, Patrick Diehl, Geoffrey C. Clayton, Bennett N. Skinner, Hartmut Kaiser, Gregor Daiß, Dirk Pflüger, Jan E. Staff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersU.S. Department of EnergyNational Nuclear Security AdministrationLouisiana State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWhite dwarfPhysicsAstrophysicsStarsOxygenSmoothed-particle hydrodynamicsShell (structure)HeliumStar (game theory)AstronomyAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We study the properties of double white dwarf (DWD) mergers by performing hydrodynamic simulations using the new and improved adaptive mesh refinement code octo-tiger. We follow the orbital evolution of DWD systems of mass ratio $q=0.7$ for tens of orbits until and after the merger to investigate them as a possible origin for R Coronae Borealis (RCB) type stars. We reproduce previous results, finding that during the merger, the helium WD donor star is tidally disrupted within 20–80 min since the beginning of the simulation onto the accretor carbon–oxygen WD, creating a high temperature shell around the accretor. We investigate the possible helium burning in this shell and the merged object’s general structure. Specifically, we are interested in the amount of oxygen-16 dredged-up from the accretor to the hot shell and the amount of oxygen-18 produced. This is critical as the discovery of very low oxygen-16 to oxygen-18 ratios in RCB stars pointed out the merger scenario as a favourable explanation for their origin. A small amount of hydrogen in the donor may help keep the oxygen-16 to oxygen-18 ratios within observational bounds, even if moderate dredge-up from the accretor occurs. In addition, we perform a resolution study to reconcile the difference found in the amount of oxygen-16 dredge-up between smoothed-particle hydrodynamics and grid-based simulations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→