Paper detail

Radiative levitation in carbon-enhanced metal-poor stars with s-process enrichment

A significant fraction of all metal-poor stars are carbon-rich. Most of these carbon-enhanced metal-poor (CEMP) stars also show enhancement in elements produced mainly by the s-process (CEMP-s stars) and evidence suggests that the origin of these non-standard abundances can be traced to mass transfer from a binary asymptotic giant branch (AGB) companion. Thus, observations of CEMP-s stars are commonly used to infer the nucleosynthesis output of low-metallicity AGB stars. A crucial step in this exercise is understanding what happens to the accreted material after mass transfer ceases. Here we present models of the post-mass-transfer evolution of CEMP-s stars considering the physics of thermohaline mixing and atomic diffusion, including radiative levitation. We find that stars with typical CEMP-s star masses (M ~ 0.85 Msun) have very shallow convective envelopes (Menv < 1e-7 Msun). Hence, the surface abundance variations arising from the competition between gravitational settling and radiative levitation should be orders of magnitude larger than observed (e.g. [C/Fe]<-1 or [C/Fe]>+4). We are therefore unable to reproduce the spread in the observed abundances with these models and conclude that some other physical process must largely suppress atomic diffusion in the outer layers of CEMP-s stars. We demonstrate that this could be achieved by some additional (turbulent) mixing process operating at the base of the convective envelope, as found by other authors. Alternatively, mass-loss rates around 1e-13 Msun/yr could also negate most of the abundance variations by eroding the surface layers and forcing the base of the convective envelope to move inwards in mass. Since atomic diffusion cannot have a substantial effect on the surface abundances of CEMP-s stars, the dilution of the accreted material, while variable in degree from one star to the next, is most likely the same for all elements.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.