MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098392415

The Astrophysical Journal, accepted MODELS OF METAL POOR STARS WITH GRAVITATIONAL SETTLING AND RADIATIVE ACCELERATIONS: I. EVOLUTION AND ABUNDANCE ANOMALIES

2001· article· en· W7098392415 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Planning and Landscape Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiative transferSettlingStarsGravitationConvectionDiffusionOpacityGravitational acceleration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1 CEntre de Recherche en Calcul Appliqué (CERCA), 5160 boul. Décarie, bureau 400, Montréal, PQ, Canada, H3X 2H9Evolution of Pop II stars 2 Evolutionary models have been calculated for Pop II stars of 0.5 to 1.0M ⊙ from the pre-main–sequence to the lower part of the giant branch. Rosseland opacities and radiative accelerations were calculated taking into account the concentration variations of 28 chemical species, including all species contributing to Rosseland opacities in the OPAL tables. The effects of radiative accelerations, thermal diffusion and gravitational settling are included. While models were calculated both for Z = 0.00017 and 0.0017, we concentrate on models with Z = 0.00017 in this paper. These are the first Pop II models calculated taking radiative acceleration into account. It is shown that, at least in a 0.8 M ⊙ star, it is a better approximation not to let Fe diffuse than to calculate its gravitational settling without including the effects of grad(Fe). In the absence of any turbulence outside of convection zones, the effects of atomic

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Planning and Landscape DesignFrench-language works237,207