Solar fusion III: New data and theory for hydrogen-burning stars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In stars that lie on the main sequence in the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, like our Sun, hydrogen is fused to helium in a number of nuclear reaction chains and series, such as the proton-proton chain and the carbon-nitrogen-oxygen cycles. Precisely determined thermonuclear rates of these reactions lie at the foundation of the standard solar model. This review, the third decadal evaluation of the nuclear physics of hydrogen-burning stars, is motivated by the great advances made in recent years by solar neutrino observatories, putting experimental knowledge of the proton-proton (pp)-chain neutrino fluxes in the few-percent precision range. The basis of the review is a one-week community meeting held in July 2022 in Berkeley, California, and many subsequent digital meetings and exchanges. The relevant reactions of solar and stellar hydrogen burning are reviewed here from both theoretical and experimental perspectives. Recommendations for the state of the art of the astrophysical S factor and its uncertainty are formulated for each of them. Several other topics of paramount importance for the solar model are reviewed as well: recent and future neutrino experiments, electron screening, radiative opacities, and current and upcoming experimental facilities. In addition to reaction-specific recommendations, general recommendations are also formed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".