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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
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
Cited by
MESA ISOCHRONES AND STELLAR TRACKS (MIST). I. SOLAR-SCALED MODELS
Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., Cantiello, M., Paxton, B., & Johnson, B. D. (2016) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/102 · Cited by 2,922
A higher-than-predicted measurement of iron opacity at solar interior temperatures
Bailey, J. E., Nagayama, T., Loisel, G. P., Rochau, G. A., Blancard, C., Colgan, J., Cosse, P., Faussurier, G., Fontes, C. J., Gilleron, F., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14048 · Cited by 441
Miller Bertolami, M. M. (2016) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526577 · Cited by 394
Nobel Lecture: The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos
McDonald, A. B. (2016) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.88.030502 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- Serenelli, A. M., Basu, S., Ferguson, J. W., & Asplund, M.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- 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.