Paper detail

Impact of Convective Boundary Mixing on the TP-AGB

The treatment of convective boundaries remains an important source of uncertainty within stellar evolution, with drastic implications for the thermally-pulsing stars on the Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB). Various sources are taken as motivation for the incorporation of convective boundary mixing during this phase, from s-process nucleosynthesis to hydrodynamical models. In spite of the considerable evidence in favour of the existence of convective boundary mixing on the pre-AGB evolution, this mixing is not universally included in models of TP-AGB stars. The aim of this investigation is to ascertain the extent of convective boundary mixing, which is compatible with observations when considering full evolutionary models. Additionally, we investigate a theoretical argument that has been made that momentum-driven overshooting at the base of the pulse-driven convection zone should be negligible. We show that, while the argument holds,estimations based on the picture of turbulent entrainment suggest that mixing is possible at both convective boundaries. We demonstrate that additional mixing at convective boundaries during core-burning phases prior to the thermally-pulsing Asymptotic Giant Branch has an impact on the later evolution, changing the mass range at which the third dredge-up and hot-bottom burning occur, and thus also the final surface composition. In addition, an effort has been made to constrain the efficiency of convective boundary mixing at the different convective boundaries, using observational constraints. Our study suggests a strong tension between different constraints that makes it impossible to reproduce all observables simultaneously within the framework of an exponentially decaying overshooting. This result calls for a reassessment of both the models of convective boundary mixing and the observational constraints.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.