The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Standard solar models, with and without helium diffusion, and the solar neutrino problem
Abstract
We first show that, with the same input parameters, the standard solar models of Bahcall and Ulrich; of Sienkiewicz, Bahcall, and Paczy\ifmmode \acute{n}\else \'{n}\fi{}ski; of Turck-Chi\`eze, Cahen, Cass\'e, and Doom; and of the current Yale code all predict event rates for the chlorine experiment that are the same within \ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.1 SNU (solar neutrino units), i.e., approximately 1% of the total calculated rate. We then construct new standard solar models using the Yale stellar evolution computer code supplemented with a more accurate (exportable) nuclear energy generation routine, an improved equation of state, recent determinations of element abundances, and the new Livermore (OPAL) opacity calculations. We evaluate the individual effects of different improvements by calculating a series of precise models, changing only one aspect of the solar model at a time. We next add a new subroutine that calculates the diffusion of helium with respect to hydrogen with the aid of the Bahcall-Loeb formalism. Finally, we compare the neutrino fluxes computed from our best solar models constructed with and without helium diffusion. We find that helium diffusion increases the predicted event rates by about 0.8 SNU, or 11% of the total rate, in the chlorine experiment; by about 3.5 SNU, or 3%, in the gallium experiments; and by about 12% in the Kamiokande and SNO experiments. The best standard solar model including helium diffusion and the most accurate nuclear parameters, element abundances, radiative opacity, and equation of state predicts a value of 8.0\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}3.0 SNU for the $^{37}\mathrm{Cl}$ experiment and ${132}_{\ensuremath{-}17}^{+21}$ SNU for the $^{71}\mathrm{Ga}$ experiment. The quoted errors represent the total theoretical range and include the effects on the model predictions of $3\ensuremath{\sigma}$ errors in measured input parameters. All 15 calculations since 1968 of the predicted rate in the chlorine experiment given in this series of papers are consistent with both the range estimated in the present work and the 1968 best-estimate value of 7.5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2.3 SNU. Including the effects of helium diffusion and the other improvements in the description of the solar interior that are implemented in this paper, the inferred primordial solar helium abundance is $Y=0.273$. The calculated depth of the convective zone is $R=0.707{R}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$, in agreement with the value of $0.713{R}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ inferred by Christensen-Dalsgaard, Gough, and Thompson from a recent analysis of the observed $p$-mode oscillation frequencies. Including helium diffusion increases the calculated present-day hydrogen surface abundance by about 4%, decreases the helium abundance by approximately 11%, and increases the calculated heavy-element abundance by about 4%. In the Appendix, we present detailed numerical tables of our best standard solar models computed both with and without including helium diffusion. In the context of the MSW (Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein) or other weak-interaction solutions of the solar neutrino problem, the numerical models can be used to compute the influence of the matter in the sun on the observed neutrino fluxes.
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
Boothroyd, A. I., & Sackmann, I.-J. (1988) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/166323 · Cited by 123
Cited by
Solar Models: Current Epoch and Time Dependences, Neutrinos, and Helioseismological Properties
Bahcall, J. N., Pinsonneault, M. H., & Basu, S. (2001) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/321493 · Cited by 885
Self-citationSolar models with helium and heavy-element diffusion
Bahcall, J. N., Pinsonneault, M. H., & Wasserburg, G. J. (1995) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.67.781 · Cited by 873
Self-citationSolar fusion cross sections. II. Theppchain and CNO cycles
Adelberger, E. G., García, A., Robertson, R. G. H., Snover, K. A., Balantekin, A. B., Heeger, K., Ramsey-Musolf, M. J., Bemmerer, D., Junghans, A., Bertulani, C. A., et al. (2011) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.83.195 · Cited by 803
Accurate Empirical Radii and Masses of Planets and Their Host Stars with Gaia Parallaxes
Stassun, K. G., Collins, K. A., & Gaudi, B. S. (2017) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa5df3 · Cited by 459
Kepler-36: A Pair of Planets with Neighboring Orbits and Dissimilar Densities
Carter, J. A., Agol, E., Chaplin, W. J., Basu, S., Bedding, T. R., Buchhave, L. A., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Deck, K. M., Elsworth, Y., Fabrycky, D. C., et al. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1223269 · Cited by 389
Metadata
- Authors
- Bahcall, J. N., & Pinsonneault, M. H.
- Venue
- Reviews of Modern Physics
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 1992-10-01
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 885-926
- ISSN
- 0034-6861 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-0756
- OpenAlex
- W2069680204
- Cited by
- 626
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 43.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Standard solar models, with and without helium diffusion, and the solar neutrino problem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/revmodphys.64.885
- The paper
- Bahcall, J. N., & Pinsonneault, M. H. (1992). Standard solar models, with and without helium diffusion, and the solar neutrino problem. Reviews of Modern Physics. https://doi.org/10.1103/revmodphys.64.885
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.