Solar and Stellar Astrophysics · arXiv:1204.3931 v1 · submitted 17 Apr 2012
The end of super AGB and massive AGB stars I. The instabilities that determine the final mass of AGB stars
The paper says
“We find that the local opacity maximum caused by M-shell electrons of Fe-group elements lead to the accumulation of an energy excess, to the departure of thermal equilibrium conditions at the base of the convective envelope and, eventually, to the divergence of the computed models.”
from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier
Reviews
Reviews by people
No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.
The paper
Abstract
The literature is rich in analysis and results related to thermally pulsing-asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) stars, but the problem of the instabilities that arise and cause the divergence of models during the late stages of their evolution is rarely addressed. We investigate the physical conditions, causes and consequences of the interruption in the calculations of massive AGB stars in the late thermally-pulsing AGB phase. We have thoroughly analysed the physical structure of a solar metallicity 8.5 solar mass star and described the physical conditions at the base of the convective envelope (BCE) just prior to divergence. We find that the local opacity maximum caused by M-shell electrons of Fe-group elements lead to the accumulation of an energy excess, to the departure of thermal equilibrium conditions at the base of the convective envelope and, eventually, to the divergence of the computed models. For the 8.5 solar mass case we present in this work the divergence occurs when the envelope mass is about 2 solar mass. The remaining envelope masses range between somewhat less than 1 and more than 2 solar mass for stars with initial masses between 7 and 10 solar mass and, therefore, our results are relevant for the evolution and yields of super-AGB stars. If the envelope is ejected as a consequence of the instability we are considering, the occurrence of electron-capture supernovae would be avoided at solar metallicity.
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
How the main claim is stated: asserted 1.00
What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.08 · states limitation 0.36 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.11 · mentions code or data availability 0.02
The abstract, sentence by sentence
This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.
| Sentence | Role | The authors' own work | States the main conclusion | Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The literature is rich in analysis and results related to thermally pulsing-asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) stars, but the problem of the instabilities that arise and cause the divergence of models during the late stages of their evolution is rarely addressed. | gap 0.73 | 0.03 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| We investigate the physical conditions, causes and consequences of the interruption in the calculations of massive AGB stars in the late thermally-pulsing AGB phase. | contribution 1.00 | 0.85 | 0.06 | asserted 0.71 |
| We have thoroughly analysed the physical structure of a solar metallicity 8.5 solar mass star and described the physical conditions at the base of the convective envelope (BCE) just prior to divergence. | contribution 0.79 | 0.96 | 0.04 | asserted 1.00 |
| We find that the local opacity maximum caused by M-shell electrons of Fe-group elements lead to the accumulation of an energy excess, to the departure of thermal equilibrium conditions at the base of the convective envelope and, eventually, to the divergence of the computed models. | result 0.97 | 0.95 | 0.80 | asserted 1.00 |
| For the 8.5 solar mass case we present in this work the divergence occurs when the envelope mass is about 2 solar mass. | result 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.11 | asserted 1.00 |
| The remaining envelope masses range between somewhat less than 1 and more than 2 solar mass for stars with initial masses between 7 and 10 solar mass and, therefore, our results are relevant for the evolution and yields of super-AGB stars. | result 0.51 | 0.89 | 0.16 | asserted 0.90 |
| If the envelope is ejected as a consequence of the instability we are considering, the occurrence of electron-capture supernovae would be avoided at solar metallicity. | interpretation 0.99 | 0.47 | 0.21 | hedged possibility 0.65 |
What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.97 · evidence from simulation or computation 1.00
What was examined, and what was not
Sources read
- arXiv listing abstract v1
Not examined
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
Levels run
- P abstract
Not run
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
How the labels were made
Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,855 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.
Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON
Cited by 1 Pith paper
Reviewed papers on Pith that cite this one. The full citation record
How the literature uses it
1 arXiv paper cite this in 2 sentences
Papers citing it · 1 sentence without a confident label
Uses its data or values 1 paper
-
Modern studies suggest that for solar metallicity models it does not exceed $1.2$ [ref] .
The Evolution of Compact Binary Star Systems · Formation of stars and end products of their evolution · 0.93
Challenges and discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.
Come back by email
A short list of the week's newly reviewed papers. Nothing is sent until you confirm from your inbox, and every email has a link that stops it. No account.
No comments yet.
Sign in to comment