4.6 Article

SYGMA: Stellar Yields for Galactic Modeling Applications

期刊

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4365/aad691

关键词

Galaxy: evolution; nuclear reactions, nucleosynthesis, abundances; stars: abundances

资金

  1. NSF [PHY-1430152]
  2. FRQNT (Quebec, Canada)
  3. ERC Consolidator Grant (Hungary) funding scheme (project RADIOSTAR, G.A.) [724560]
  4. European Research Council under the European Union [306901]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Stellar Yields for Galactic Modeling Applications (SYGMA) code is an open-source module that models the chemical ejecta and feedback of simple stellar populations (SSPs). It is intended for use in hydrodynamical simulations and semi-analytic models of galactic chemical evolution. The module includes the enrichment from asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars, massive stars, Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia), and compact binary mergers. An extensive and extendable stellar yields library includes the NuGrid yields with all elements and many isotopes up to Bi. Stellar feedback from mechanic and frequency-dependent radiative luminosities are computed based on NuGrid stellar models and their synthetic spectra. The module further allows for customizable initial mass functions and SN. Ia delay-time distributions to calculate time-dependent ejecta based on stellar yield input. A variety of r-process sites can be included. A comparison of SSP ejecta based on NuGrid yields with those from Portinari et al. and Marigo reveals up to factors of 3.5 and 4.8 less C and N enrichment from AGB stars at low metallicity, a result we attribute to NuGrid's modeling of hot-bottom burning. Different core-collapse supernova explosions and fallback prescriptions may lead to substantial variations for the accumulated ejecta of C, O and Si in the first 10(7) years at Z = 0.001. An online interface of the open-source SYGMA module enables interactive simulations, analysis, and data extraction of the evolution of all species formed by the evolution of simple stellar populations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据