Paper detail

Atomic diffusion in solar-like stars with MESA. Comparison with the Montreal/Montpellier and CESTAM stellar evolution codes

The stellar evolution code Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) is public and is widely used by the community. It includes the possibility of taking several non-standard processes such as atomic diffusion into account. Even if the effect of gravitational settling is considered a standard ingredient in stellar modelling today, this is not the case for radiative accelerations. The specific treatment of atomic diffusion along with the radiative accelerations has never been compared with other stellar evolution codes. Benchmarking these codes is important because improved accuracy is required in order to analyse data from present and future space missions, such as the \textit{Kepler}, Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), and PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of stars (PLATO) missions. The aim of this paper is to compare MESA models including atomic diffusion (with radiative accelerations) with models computed with the Montreal/Montpellier stellar evolution code and with the Code d'Evolution Stellaire Adaptatif et Modulaire (CESTAM). Additionally, we assess the impact of some MESA options related to atomic diffusion. We calculated atomic diffusion, including radiative accelerations, following the abundance profiles of 14 elements with MESA models. This was then compared with 1.1 and 1.4~$M_{\odot}$ models computed with the Montreal/Montpellier and CESTAM codes. Various tests of MESA options for atomic diffusion were also carried out by varying only one of them at a time. We find that the abundance profiles of the considered elements in the MESA models compare rather well with the models computed with the two other codes when atomic diffusion options are carefully set. We also show that some options in MESA are crucial for a proper treatment of atomic diffusion.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.