Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 351

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

NEW SOLAR COMPOSITION: THE PROBLEM WITH SOLAR MODELS REVISITED

Open access
Serenelli, Aldo M., Basu, Sarbani, Ferguson, Jason W., Asplund, Martin·2009·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

We construct updated solar models with different sets of solar abundances, including the most recent determinations by Asplund et al. The latter work predicts a larger (∼10%) solar metallicity compared to previous measurements by the same authors but significantly lower (∼25%) than the recommended value from a decade ago by Grevesse & Sauval. We compare the results of our models with determinations of the solar structure inferred through helioseismology measurements. The model that uses the most recent solar abundance determinations predicts the base of the solar convective envelope to be located at R CZ = 0.724 R ☉ and a surface helium mass fraction of Y surf = 0.231. These results are in conflict with helioseismology data ( R CZ = 0.713 ± 0.001 R ☉ and Y surf = 0.2485 ± 0.0035) at 5σ and 11σ levels, respectively. Using the new solar abundances, we calculate the magnitude by which radiative opacities should be modified in order to restore agreement with helioseismology. We find that a maximum change of ∼15% at the base of the convective zone is required with a smooth decrease toward the core, where the change needed is ∼5%. The required change at the base of the convective envelope is about half the value estimated previously. We also present the solar neutrino fluxes predicted by the new models. The most important changes brought about by the new solar abundances are the increase by ∼10% in the predicted 13 N and 15 O fluxes that arise mostly due to the increase in the C and N abundances in the newly determined solar composition.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/l123

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

  • Low‐Temperature Opacities

    Ferguson, J. W., Alexander, D. R., Allard, F., Barman, T., Bodnarik, J. G., Hauschildt, P. H., Heffner‐Wong, A., & Tamanai, A. (2005) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/428642 · Cited by 1,327

    Self-citation

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 351

Metadata

Authors
Serenelli, A. M., Basu, S., Ferguson, J. W., & Asplund, M.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2009-10-20
Volume
705
Issue
2
Pages
L123-L127
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
OpenAlex
W1974245736
Cited by
351
References
1
FWCI
9.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: NEW SOLAR COMPOSITION: THE PROBLEM WITH SOLAR MODELS REVISITED. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/l123
The paper
Serenelli, A. M., Basu, S., Ferguson, J. W., & Asplund, M. (2009). NEW SOLAR COMPOSITION: THE PROBLEM WITH SOLAR MODELS REVISITED. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/l123

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.