Paper detail

A two-parameter criterion for classifying the explodability of massive stars by the neutrino-driven mechanism

Thus far, judging the fate of a massive star (either a neutron star (NS) or a black hole) solely by its structure prior to core collapse has been ambiguous. Our work and previous attempts find a non-monotonic variation of successful and failed supernovae with zero-age main-sequence mass, for which no single structural parameter can serve as a good predictive measure. However, we identify two parameters computed from the pre-collapse structure of the progenitor, which in combination allow for a clear separation of exploding and non-exploding cases with only few exceptions (~1-2.5%) in our set of 621 investigated stellar models. One parameter is M4, defining the normalized enclosed mass for a dimensionless entropy per nucleon of s=4, and the other is mu4 = d(m/M_sun)/d(r/1000 km) at s=4, being the normalized mass-derivative at this location. The two parameters mu4 and M4*mu4 can be directly linked to the mass-infall rate, Mdot, of the collapsing star and the electron-type neutrino luminosity of the accreting proto-NS, L_nue ~ M_ns*Mdot, which play a crucial role in the "critical luminosity" concept for the theoretical description of neutrino-driven explosions as runaway phenomenon of the stalled accretion shock. All models were evolved employing the approach of Ugliano et al. for simulating neutrino-driven explosions in spherical symmetry. The neutrino emission of the accretion layer is approximated by a gray transport solver, while the uncertain neutrino emission of the 1.1 M_sun proto-NS core is parametrized by an analytic model. The free parameters connected to the core-boundary prescription are calibrated to reproduce the observables of Supernova 1987A for five different progenitor models.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.