What is a thermonuclear reaction network and why should I care?
If you work in nuclear astrophysics, you may not have realized the close
connection between your work and thermonuclear reaction networks. Let us examine
some examples:
Student A works in low-energy experimental nuclear physics and
she measured the cross section of an astrophysically interesting reaction
for her dissertation,
Postdoc B is an observational astronomer and has measured the elemental
abundances of Galactic metal-poor stars,
Student C works in nuclear theory and has implemented a new Equation of
State (EoS) to be used in Neutron Star (NS) and Supernovae (SNe) simulations,
Postdoc D wants to study the effect of a reaction rate to the energy
generation in her hydrodynamics code.
What do they all have in common? Their results are interconnected using thermonuclear reaction networks!
Networks are groups of things that are connected in some way, and we can find them
everywhere. The most common example is the social network: your family,
friends, colleagues and the rest of the people you are interacting socially
(nowadays we can find virtual counterparts of these networks). A network
consists of nodes (in our social network example, people), and edges (social connections).
There is a very active academic field which studies networks and their
interactions, called network science.
A simple network. The nodes are connected with the edges.
Similarly, thermonuclear reaction networks connect nuclei via nuclear
processes, such as reactions and decays.
An additional complexity is that the reaction networks we will study in this
lecture evolve over time, according to the thermodynamical conditions of the
environment (typically only temperature, T(t) and density, \rho(t)), and for this
reason we are also interested in the reactive flows.
In this lecture we will discuss how these reactions enter the network, when they matter and when they don’t.
We call these reactions thermonuclear because they are caused by the thermal motion
of the involved nuclei, which almost always obey a Maxwellian
distribution.
A visualization of a nuclear reaction network based on the Reaclib
database. There are ~8,000 isotopes (nodes) and ~77,000 nuclear processes
(edges) connecting them. Some network regions undergo more nuclear
reactions than others (red rectangle versus blue rectangle).
The figure is adapted from Jiang et al. (2021) .
A thermonuclear reaction network
is a system of first-order coupled differential equations,
which describes the abundance evolution and energy generation, and depends
only on the nuclear reaction rates and the local thermodynamical conditions
.
Thermonuclear reaction rates
Before we delve into the inner workings of thermonuclear reaction networks, let
us first imagine that we are around 150 million kilometers (93 million
miles) away from the Earth, inside the core of our beloved Sun. To enjoy the heat and
warmth the Sun provides, there is an active transformation of its main ingredient,
hydrogen (which also happens to be the most abundant element in the universe),
to helium (the second most abundant element). From the small mass difference between \mathrm{^1H} (p)
and \mathrm{^{4}He} (\alpha) there is a release of energy equal to:
where \Delta m are the “mass excesses” of hydrogen and
heliumAround 2% of that energy is lost by the emitted
neutrinos. This transformation is the most efficient nuclear burning
process. See a table further down for a comparison with other hydrostatic
burning processes..
For the last 4.6 billion years hydrogen is continuously “burned” into helium
in the heart of the Sun. To familiarize ourselves with thermonuclear reaction networks,
we will recreate the main fusion process that powers the Sun, the proton-proton (pp-)
chainIn fact there are 3 distinct pp-chain branches, but we will
only discuss the first one, pp-I, which provides almost 90% of the Sun's
energy output..
A visualization of the reactions in the pp-chain.
Let us consider for simplicity that the core of the Sun is made out of only
four nuclear species, namely \mathrm{^1H}~(p), \mathrm{^2H}~(d), \mathrm{^3He}
and \mathrm{^4He}~(\alpha)The Sun is a relatively young star,
and carries in its atmosphere the signatures (elements heavier than helium) of nucleosynthesis from the stars
that lived and died in the past.. In the pp-chain network the following reactions can take place:
From now on, we will use the typical nuclear physics notation for nuclear
reactions: p(p,e^+ \nu_e)d, d(p,\gamma)\mathrm{^3He} and
\mathrm{^3He}(\mathrm{^3He},2p)\mathrm{^4He}, respectively. The net effect in the
environment is the conversion of 4 protons to one helium
nucleus and the release of 26.73 MeV in the environment in the form of
\gamma-rays and neutrinos. In the Figure below, you can see a visualization
of the pp-chain in a pure p gas.
A visualization of our stellar gas, made out \mathrm{^1H}~(p).
As time moves forward, fusion reactions of the pp-chain produce
\mathrm{^2H}~(d), \mathrm{^3He}, \mathrm{^4He}~(\alpha) and
\gamma-rays. The neutrinos have already escaped the stellar gas,
due to their tiny interaction probability, and are not depicted.
These thermonuclear reactions have a twofold importance for astrophysical
environments: first they generate energy that stabilizes the star from
gravitational collapse and at the same time they transform its constituents by
synthesizing new nuclear species.
The first step in the pp-chain is the p(p,e^+ \nu_e)d reaction, in which a
proton is converted into a neutron, which becomes part of the deuteron. This
reaction is affected by the weak nuclear force, and for this reason its cross
section (or the probability that the reaction occurs in the stellar gas) is
very small. In fact, it is extremely difficult to recreate it in a laboratory,
due to the tiny event rateTypical event rates, using very dense
proton targets and intense proton beams, yield around one event every 6 years,
without accounting for the detection efficiency!.
The second step in the pp-chain is the d(p,\gamma)\mathrm{^3He}
reaction, where the deuteron was synthesized by the p(p,e^+ \nu_e)d
reaction. Reactions that emit a \gamma-ray in the exit channel are generally
called radiative capture reactions and are very common in nuclear
astrophysics. The rate of this reaction, which we can define as the number
of reactions per volume and unit time, can be written as followsIn
case of identical particles, we can generalize Equation
to r_{ab} = \frac{n_an_b \langle \sigma v
\rangle_{ab}}{(1+\delta_{ab})},
where \delta_{ab} is the Kronecker symbol.
where n_d and n_p are the concentrations, or number densities, of p and
d per unit volume (usually expressed in
cm-3). These are dynamical quantities regulated by the nuclear
processes that involve them. \langle \sigma v \rangle_{dp} is the
average value of the reaction cross section \sigma (usually expressed in
barns, where 1 b \equiv 10-24 cm2) and the
relative velocity distribution of the interacting particles.
Number density can change if the gas expands or contracts (remember that it
is species per unit volume). For this reason, we need a conserved quantity
which reflects the nuclear transformations that occur in the gas. There are two
such quantities that are commonly used in astrophysics, the mass fraction,
X_i and the abundance, Y_i. The three quantities, number density,
mass fraction and abundance are related through the following expression
where A_i is the atomic mass of species i in amu (for example A_{\mathrm{^{4}He}}=
4.0026 amu) and N_A is the Avogadro constant (N_A = 6.022 \times 10^{23} mol-1).
If we apply the nucleon number conservation in the
environmentRemember that nuclear reactions generate energy! The
mass is not conserved, but rather the number of nucleons., we can get the following
useful expressions for the mass fractions and the abundances, respectively
Now that we have convinced ourselves that we are measuring the change of
the constituents of the gas that is caused by nuclear processes, we can move
on to the calculation of the thermonuclear reaction rate \langle \sigma v \rangle.
In a stellar gas, like in our example, the temperature is high enough
to ionize completely the constituent atoms (bare nuclei), such that they do not experience
any long range electronic interactions. The relative velocity of
the interacting particles can be described by the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution
which expresses the probability that the relative velocity of
two particles lies between v and v+dv.
\mu = m_d m_p/ (m_d+m_p) is the reduced mass of the system,
k is the Boltzmann constant, with a value of k= 8.6173 \times 10^{-5} eV/K
and T is the gas temperature expressed in Kelvin. The Maxwell-Boltzmann
distribution shows the following behavior: it increases
linearly with energy E at low energies, E \ll kT, reaches a
maximum value at E = kT and decreases exponentially at high energies, E \gg kT.
This behavior is crucial when considering at which energies the
astrophysically interesting reactions take place.
We can express the Maxwell-Boltzmann particle velocity distribution as an
energy distribution (convert using E= \frac{1}{2} \mu v^2) and obtain
the reaction rate in the center-of-mass energy (in units of cm3 mol-1 s-1)
Equation is a general expression for the thermonuclear reaction
rate. In principle, the only missing piece for its calculation
is the energy–dependent reaction cross section, \sigma(E). Once this
quantity is either measured experimentally, or estimated theoretically,
It can then be integrated numerically and evaluated at the temperature of
interest.
In general, there are few cases in which Equation can be solved
analytically, because the cross section has a relatively simple energy
dependence. A smooth (non-resonant) and a strong (resonant) energy dependence
of the cross-section are encountered frequently in nuclear astrophysics.
For non-resonant reactions, the cross section \sigma(E) can be re-written as
where S(E) is called the astrophysical S-factor and it is a slowly varying
function of energy that removes the strong 1/E energy dependence of
\sigma(E). Substituting Equation to gives us
The integrant of the above expression exhibits a very interesting energy
dependence. Multiplying the transmission probability through the Coulomb
barrier, e^{-2\pi \eta}, which increases with increasing energy, with the
Maxwell-Boltzmann factor, which decreases with increasing energy, results in a
peak which defines an energy region where it is more probable for nuclear
reactions to occur in a stellar gas. The peak is commonly referred to as the
Gamow peak.
For resonant reactions, the cross section can be described by the single-level
Breit-Wigner formulaNote that this description is valid for
resonances which have approximately constant partial widths over the total
resonance with (Γ(E)/Er < 0.1, called narrow) and in addition do not
overlap significantly with other resonances (isolated):
where \lambda is the de Broglie wavelength, which expresses the wave nature of the interacting particles, j_i are the spin of projectile and target, J and E_r are the spin and energy
of the resonance respectively, Γ_i are the partial widths for entrance and exit channels
and \Gamma is the sum of all the partial widths \Gamma_i, which correspond to the energetically
allowed decay channels.
Using Equation we can solve analytically Equation . In
the case of many resonances, we can add them incoherently and write the
thermonuclear reaction rate as follows
where \omega = (2J+1)/(2j_a+1)(2j_b+1) is the nuclear spin factor and
\omega \gamma is called the resonance strength, \omega \gamma \equiv
\omega \frac{\Gamma_1 \Gamma_2}{\Gamma}, and it is proportional to the area
under the resonance cross section, or the product of the total resonance width
and the cross section at the resonance energy, \Gamma \cdot \sigma(E=E_r).
Another way to calculate the reaction cross section \sigma(E) or the
astrophysical S-factor is the use of R-matrix theory.
See R.J. deBoer lecture
The main assumption of that framework is that the particle configuration space can be separated in an
internal region, where the total wave function can be expanded into a complete
set of eigenstates and the external where the possible combinations of
particles exist.
For nucleosynthesis processes that involve exotic nuclei, reaction rates are
usually based on theoretical estimates for \sigma(E). For example, in the r-process we
rely on calculations based on the Hauser-Feshbach statistical model for the
(n, \gamma) reactions on exotic neutron-rich species.
See G. Perdikakis lecture
This model is used to describe cross sections in higher excitation energies of
intermediate and heavy nuclei, where the density of nuclear levels
is high enough to take a statistically average contribution of many Breit-Wigner resonances. It assumes
that the compound nucleus formed in a reaction undergoes a sequence of
statistical decays, where the excitation energy is partitioned among the
available degrees of freedom of the system, such as nucleons, \gamma-rays, and other particles.
To calculate thermonuclear reaction rates, one needs to solve Equation
numerically or analytically. Given that reaction rates carry
uncertainty from many different factors, such as resonance energies, resonance
strengths etc., we need a statistically meaningful way to treat them. One
of the ways used in the nuclear astrophysics community is to treat each
nuclear physics input as a (lognormal) distribution and sample thousands of
times using a Monte Carlo technique, solving Equation every time.
That way, one calculates a thermonuclear reaction rate with temperature dependent uncertainty
(essentially for every temperature point, you get a distribution for the
reaction rate, and from the 16th (lower) and 84th (high) percentile you can
define the 1\sigma confidence level). The code RatesMC, which was
developed by R. Longland (NCSU/TUNL) performs such
calculations.You can find RatesMC in Github
.
More recently, Bayesian statistics along with Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)
algorithms have been used to calculate S-factors of astrophysically important
reactions.
Forming the network
The rate equations
Let us return to the core of the Sun and try to write the differential
equations that describe the abundance evolution for all the different species.
p is destroyed by the p(p,e^+\nu)d and d(p,\gamma)\mathrm{^{3}He}
reactions and produced by the \mathrm{^3He(^3He, 2p)^4He}. We expect that
this will be proportional to the initial abundance and also the reaction
rate. Using Equations and we can write
Similarly, d is produced by the p(p,e^+\nu)d and destroyed by the d(p,\gamma)\mathrm{^{3}He}.
\mathrm{^3He} is created by the d(p,\gamma)\mathrm{^{3}He} and destroyed
by the \mathrm{^{3}He}(\mathrm{^{3}He},2p)\mathrm{^{4}He}:
Finally \alpha-particles are created only by the
\mathrm{^{3}He}(\mathrm{^{3}He},2p)\mathrm{^{4}He} reaction.
Imagine doing the same exercise for thousands of nuclei that are connected
with tens of thousands of reactions!
This is the size of a typical r-process reaction network!
Most reactions can be grouped into three
functional categories, according to the number of interacting nuclei:
reactions involving a single species, such as decays and electron/positron
captures, two (e.g. our p(d,\gamma)\mathrm{^3He}) and three
(e.g.\mathrm{^4He(\alpha \alpha,\gamma)^{12}C} – triple–\alpha
reaction) nuclei.
We can write a generalized abundance evolution equation for Y_i, or rate
equation, as follows
where \lambda_j is called the decay constant, \langle \sigma v \rangle_{jk} and \langle \sigma v \rangle_{jkl} are
the thermonuclear reaction rates for 2- and 3-body reactions. Note that in the
latter we multiplied by (\rho N_A)^2 to account for the third particle. The
Ns are used to make sure we do not double-count produced (or destroyed) species.
We can also express the same relation, more generally as
where \mathbf{y} is the vector of all the abundances Y_i (or mass
fractions X_i) in the network (Y_1, Y_2, \cdots, Y_{i_{max}}),
\dot{\mathbf{y}} is the time derivative, and f is
a function which depends on the abundances Y_i and the thermodynamical
properties of the environment, T(t), \rho(t), \ldots.
The ingredients
To solve (integrate) the rate equation we need some input. First and
foremost, we need the nuclear physics information about the isotopes in the
network; that is their reaction rates, reaction Q-values, half-lifes
(if they are radioactive), fission fragment distributions (if they are
fissionable) and partition functions, the sum of thermally populated levels.
You might wonder why we did not mention nuclear masses, which have a high
level of ongoing research activity. The nuclear masses enter the rate equation
via the Q-value (for example in neutron captures, photodissociation rates and
\beta-decays). If a new mass measurement is made, that updates the Q-value in the network.
See A. Kankainen and M. Li lectures
For example, in the r-process, (n, \gamma) and (\gamma, n) rates depend on the mass
difference, or neutron separation energyS_n. Specifically for the
(\gamma, n) rates, using the principle of detailed balance and S_n we can write
where \langle \sigma v \rangle_{(Z, N-1)} is the neutron capture - (n,
\gamma) - rate of the neighboring nucleus.
Another nuclear input that is used when solving a thermonuclear reaction
network is the Equation Of State (EOS), which gives us the relation between
temperature, pressure, and density in the gas.
As far as the astrophysics input is concerned we are mainly interested
in the time evolution of the temperature and density of the plasma and
in many cases its electron mole fraction Y_e \equiv n_p (n_p+n_n)^{-1}. If Y_e
< 0.5 we have a neutron-rich gas, and in the case of Y_e>0.5
we have a neutron-deficient one. In some special cases, where
the neutrino properties are of interest (e.g. in neutrino-driven wind
ejecta) we also need to know the evolution of neutrino-related quantities,
such as their luminosity, which are used to calculate the Y_e.
The properties of the astrophysical environment can be obtained from hydrodynamic
simulations. For quiescent, hydrostatic burning (e.g. hydrogen burning in a
main sequence star) the temperature and density history of the gas is constant
and the local energy release from nuclear reactions does not change the conditions.
For other processes, however, such that in explosive nucleosynthesis we need
to know the time evolution of the thermodynamical quantities. In cases where
there is a shock which heats up and compresses the gas to a peak temperature
and density and then expands adiabatically, we can easily model it using an
exponential function T(t) = T_{peak}e^{-T/\tau_T}, \rho(t)= \rho_{peak}e^{-t/\tau_\rho}.
These are also known as “parametric profiles”, since we can change the main
parameters of each relation (peak value and the timescale). The advantage of
such a paramtrization is that it is computationally less expensive and it also
allows for the exploration of the relevant parameter phase space (see for example the work of
Iliadis et al (2018)). A common
technique to extract thermodynamical quantities from a simulation is to
use “tracer particles” ,
which are mass packets advected with the flow of the gas and follow the
evolution of key parameters as a function of time (e.g. temperature,
density, velocity etc.).
Solving the network
In the previous sections we constructed the system of differential equations
that describes the time evolution of the abundances and we know the initial
conditions of the system (in our solar burning example is X_p(t=0)=1,
X_d=X_{\mathrm{^3He}}=X_\alpha=0). We are now ready to solve (integrate) the rate equations.
The coefficients of our rate equations (thermonuclear reaction rates) span
many orders of magnitude, due to their strong temperature dependence (Equation
). For example, in the pp-chain network, the p(p,e^+\nu)d reaction
has a timescale of billions of years, and the \mathrm{p(d,\gamma)^3He} only
seconds! For this reason, our system is stiff, meaning that its solution is
numerically unstable, and as such, smaller steps of
integration must be used.
Let us examine an example of a stiff equation:
with boundary condition . Below you can find a python
script which solves the equation and also shows the size of the timesteps used.
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from scipy.integrate import solve_ivp
# Define the function for the stiff equation
def stiff_eq(t, y):
return -21 * y + np.exp(-t)
# Set the initial condition and time range for the solution
y0 = [0]
t_span = [0, 10]
# Define a function to track the step size used by the solver
def track_step_size(t, y):
if sol.t_events is not None:
track_step_size.steps.append(np.abs(sol.t_events[0][0] - t))
return 0
# Initialize an empty list to store the step sizes
track_step_size.steps = []
# Use solve_ivp to solve the equation numerically
sol = solve_ivp(stiff_eq, t_span, y0, method='Radau',
dense_output=True, events=lambda t, y: track_step_size(t, y))
# Create an array of times to evaluate the step size at
t_eval = np.linspace(0, 10, len(track_step_size.steps))
# Evaluate the solution at the desired times
y = sol.sol(t_eval).T
# Plot the solution and the step size in subplots
fig, axs = plt.subplots(2, sharex= True)
fig.subplots_adjust(hspace=0)
axs[0].plot(t_eval, y, color='k')
axs[0].set_ylabel('x(t)')
axs[0].tick_params(direction='in', which='both', right=True, top=True)
axs[0].minorticks_on()
axs[1].plot(t_eval, track_step_size.steps, color='k')
axs[1].set_ylim(1e-3,20)
axs[1].set_xlabel('t')
axs[1].set_ylabel('Step size')
axs[1].set_yscale('log')
axs[1].tick_params(direction='in', which='both', right=True, top=True)
axs[1].minorticks_on()
fig.align_ylabels()
plt.show()
(Top) The solution of the differential equation as a function of
time. (Bottom) The step size used by the solver to reach to the
solution. At early times \Delta t \ll 1 and at later times \Delta t
\approx t .
The above equation is considered stiff because the solution has rapidly changing behavior on a
short timescale (due to the exponential term e^{-t}), but the overall behavior of the
solution changes much more slowly (due to the negative coefficient on y). This
can make it difficult to solve numerically using standard methods, as the step
size must be very small to capture the fast changes accurately (as in for t
\ll 1).
If we return to our general equation for the network (Equation )
we can approximate the time derivative by a finite difference
where \mathbf{y_n}, \mathbf{y_{n+1}} are the abundance vectors in time t_n
and t_{n+1}, and h is the integration time-step. According to the choice
of \Theta we get different integration methods
The explicit scheme will encounter difficulties due to the stiffness of the
problem, since the integration time steps will have to become
tiny. Using an implicit scheme, we can express the change in abundances
using Equation as
Thermonuclear reaction network codes employ backwards/implicit or semi-implicit methods, due to the stiffness
of the nucleosynthesis reaction networks. Widely
used examples include “Wagoner’s method” (2nd order Runge-Kutta) ,
Gear’s backward differentiation method and the Bader-Deuflhard semi-implicit method . We will not discuss these schemes any further,
but the interested reader is referred to the work of Longland et al (2014) which
compares the performance of different integration methods. For reaction
networks coupled with hydrodynamic codes, the work of Timmes (1999) is a great starting point.
Generaly, to find a solution of Equation we can re-write
it in a matrix form as follows
\mathbf{I} is the unitary matrix and \mathbf{J} = \partial f / \partial
\mathbf{y} is called the Jacobian matrix.
The Jacobian matrix
We can write the Jacobian \mathbf{J} in its matrix form
Note that we are taking the partial derivative of individual abundances Y_i
in each matrix element. The resulting Jacobian’s size is n_{max} \times
n_{max}. For our pp-chain example, if we make the substitution
R_{ab} = \rho N_A \langle \sigma v \rangle_{ab}, the Jacobian takes the
following form
Each Jacobian matrix element represents the flow of an isotope (positive or
negative) per second.
A more mathematically rigorous definition of the stiffness of a reaction
network states that the negative \mathcal{R}(\lambda_j) (the real
part of the Jacobian eigenvalues \lambda_j)
for j = 1,2,\ldots, N. In the thermonuclear reaction networks \mathcal{S} > 10^{15}
are typical, due to the orders of magnitude differences in the reaction
rates. The number of zero entries in the Jacobian (sparcity) increases with
increasing number of isotopes in the network.
With a few exceptions (e.g.\mathrm{^{12}C+^{12}C, ^{12}C+^{16}O, 3\alpha}
or fission) for each nucleus we only have to consider reactions linking it to the nearby
species by the capture of a proton, neutron, helium nucleus or \gamma-ray
and their reverse. That is 12 different reaction types, namely (p,\gamma),
(\alpha, p), (p,n), (\alpha, \gamma), (\alpha, n), (n,\gamma),
(n,p), (\gamma, p), (n, \alpha), (\gamma, \alpha), (p, \alpha) and (\gamma, n).
Graphic representation of a
Jacobian matrix. The non-coloured squares correspond to zero elements in the
matrix. [Fig. source]
The solvers
The most computationally intensive part of a thermonuclear reaction network
calculation is solving Equation . Dedicated sparse solvers
are used to perform this operation and below you can find a short list of the most commonly used ones
SuperLU
BLAS
LAPACK
Pardiso
Armadillo
Trilinos
The pp-chain abundances
If we solve the reaction network using any of the methods we discussed above,
we can get the time evolution of the abundances (mass fractions) for the four
species in the pp-chains.
Time evolution of the mass fractions for the species in the pp-chain example.
If you look closely, there is an interesting feature in the evolution of X_p
and X_d.
Few special cases
In general we just need to solve the rate equation for every species in the
network, however there are two special cases, where the abundance evolution
can be calculated very easily.
Equilibrium
In the pp-chain example, starting with a pure proton gas, Equation will
only have the first term in the right-hand side. Gradually, the
p(p,e^+\nu_e)d reaction will produce deuteron, but it will also be destroyed
by the p(d,\gamma)\mathrm{^3He} reaction. Eventually the deuteron abundance
will reach an equilibrium (\frac{dY_d}{dt}=0), meaning that its abundance
will stay constant over time, despite the nuclear reactions that occur.
To find the equilibrium ratio between deuteron and protons, we just need to
solve Equation
Even if we had a lot of deuteron in our stellar gas, the equilibrium would
still be achieved. That is because the second term in Equation will
dominate in early times, destroying deuteron, until the equilibrium is established.
Nuclear Statistical Equilibrium (NSE)
Another special case occurs when the temperature in the
astrophysical gas is very high (T \geq 3 \times 10^9~K).
In such conditions, the thermonuclear reaction rates may be fast
enough to achieve equilibrium faster than the timescale of the
astophysical setting (in a core-collapse supernova or a neutron star merger, for example).
In this Nuclear Statistical Equilibrium (NSE), all nuclei are in balance
through strong and electromagnetic interactions. At NSE conditions, the nuclear
reaction network is greatly simplified and the abundance Y_i,
of each species can be calculated in terms of the abundance of protons Y_p,
and neutrons, Y_n, by applying the Saha equation
where G_i and B_i is the partition function and binding
energy of species i, A_i is its mass number, N the number of neutrons,
Z the number of protons and \rho and T are the density and
temperature of the environment. In other words, in NSE the composition of the
nuclear matter is determined by statistical mechanics alone and is independent
of the previous nucleosynthesis history of the matter. The unique solution of
the network for (T,\rho,Y_e) can be obtained using two constraints, namely
mass (Equation or ) and charge conservation
In the Figure below we can see how the most dominant species change as the
neutron richness of the material changes for the same temperature and density
(neutron excess \eta \equiv \sum_i (A_i-2Z_i)Y_i, where A_i and Z_i is
the mass number and the number of protons for species i).
Abundances of the dominant species versus neutron excess parameter \eta
(or electron mole fraction Y_e) in a nuclear statistical equilibrium composition at
T = 3.5 GK and ρ = 107 g/cm3. The abundances
on either side of \eta = 0 (Y_e = 0.5) show a different
behavior .
Energy generation
As we have already discussed, nuclear reactions release energy from the
conversion of nucleons, and that affects the evolution of the astrophysical
environment. The energy released by nuclear reactions and neutrinos,
\mathrm{\epsilon}, can be calculated using
where m_i c^2 is the rest mass energy of species i in MeV and the last
term in the right-hand side corresponds to the neutrino losses.
The following table shows the energy released from different burning
stages. Note that the energy
released in the more advanced burning stages is much smaller than in the
typical core hydrogen burning. For this reason, they operate for a much shorter
time (>millions of years for hydrogen burning vs few days for silicon burning!)
Process
Burning stage
q (MeV/nucleon)
\mathrm{ H \rightarrow ^4He}
Hydrogen burning
5-7
\mathrm{ 3\alpha \rightarrow ^{12}C}
Hydrogen burning
0.606
\mathrm{ 4\alpha \rightarrow ^{16}O}
Helium burning
0.902
\mathrm{ 2^{12}C \rightarrow ^{24}Mg}
Helium burning
0.52
\mathrm{ 2^{20}Ne \rightarrow ^{16}O+^{24}Mg}
Neon burning
0.11
\mathrm{ 2^{16}O \rightarrow ^{32}Si}
Oxygen burning
0.52
\mathrm{ ^{28}Si \rightarrow ^{56}Ni}
Silicon burning
0-0.31
Hydrodynamic codes require an accurate energy generation calculation, but
including thousands of species in the reaction network and solving stellar
evolution equations is computationally expensive.
For this reason, reduced networks are used instead, which include much less
species, but can follow the energy generation with a ~20% uncertainty. A typical
reaction network for hydrodynamic codes include \alpha-nuclei reaction network from He to Ni
\mathrm{^4He}, \mathrm{^{12}C}, \mathrm{^{16}O}, \mathrm{^{20}Ne},
\mathrm{^{24}Mg}, \mathrm{^{28}Si}, \mathrm{^{32}S}, \mathrm{^{36}Ar},
\mathrm{^{40}Ca}, \mathrm{^{44}Ti}, \mathrm{^{48}Cr}, \mathrm{^{52}Fe}
and \mathrm{^{56}Ni} connected mainly by (\alpha,\gamma)-(\gamma,\alpha)
reactions, the triple-\alpha reaction and the heavy ion reactions
\mathrm{^{12}C+^{12}C}, \mathrm{^{12}C+^{16}O}, and \mathrm{^{16}O+^{16}O}
.
The codes
After all this discussion about reaction networks, do you want to run some
calculations? That’s great! 😁 There are many codes in the nuclear
astrophysics community that are used for different nucleosynthesis processes;
some of them are open-source, others are not. I have compiled a
non-exhaustive list of such codes in the following tableIf there are codes that I am missing, please
contact me and I will include them!
Name
Description
Is it open-source?
Reference
GSINet
of BasNet
Mendoza-Temis et al. (2015)
WebNucleo
example text
Meyer (2012)
NuPPN
example text
Within the NuGrid collaboration
Pignatari et al. (2016)
PRISM
r-process mainly
Sprouse et al. (2021)
SkyNet
Text
Lippuner and Roberts (2017)
torch
Text
Timmes (1999)
WinNet
of BasNet
Winteler et al. (2012)
XNet
Both post-processing and reduced network
Hix and Meyer (2006)
Sensitivity studies using reaction networks
One of the awesome things we can do using thermonuclear reaction networks,
given the capabilities of modern computers, is multiple (>thousands)
calculations of the same profile (astrophysical condition). What can we learn
from that? By changing individual nuclear parameters, for example a reaction
rate, one can see the effect in the final elemental or even isotopic abundance
pattern. Through the years researchers in our field have taken different
approaches for these sensitivity studies. In the 2000s it was common to
vary individually reaction rates within their uncertainty: a typical example
is the seminal work of Iliadis et al. (2002) on classical novae nucleosynthesis. In that
study the authors varied 175 reaction rates (out of 1265) in a 142 species
network, from the then most recent evaluations. The goal was to find reactions
which rate uncertainty affects isotopic abundances in classical novae. They
found ~20 reactions - (p,\gamma) and (p,\alpha) which affect isotopic
abundances in CO and ONe novae. The work of Ref. motivated a series of experimental
measurements through the 2000s and 2010s, both direct and indirect, that
reduced the uncertainties of the highlighted reaction rates.
During the 2010s researchers start using Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms to
perform sensitivity studies. In this class of works - some notable examples
for different nucleosynthesis scenarios are listed in the table below -
reaction rates are randomly sampled from a distribution, which reflects their
uncertainty, in every calculation. The reactions that influence abundances
are identified by the correlation between the factor by which the
rate was changed and the effect in the abundance.
Scenario
Reference
Notes
BBN
Iliadis and Coc (2020)
MC study using Bayesian rates
Nova nucleosynthesis
Iliadis et al (2002)
Individual rates change
s-process
Cescutti et al. (2018)
MC study
i-process
Denissenkov et al. (2021)
MC study of (n, \gamma) rates
weak r-process
Bliss et al. (2020) , Psaltis et al. (2022)
MC study of (\alpha, n) rates
\nu p-process
Wanajo et al (2011) , Nishimura et al. (2019)
Individual rates, MC study
r-process
Mumpower et al. (2016) Giuliani et al (2020) Vassh et al. (2019)
MC study on nuclear masses, β-decay halflives and (n,\gamma) rates, fission barriers, MCMC for lanthanide production
\gamma-process
Rapp et al (2006) Rauscher et al. (2016)
Individual rates change, MC study
rp-process
Parikh et al. (2008) , Cyburt et al. (2016)
Individual rates change
Type Ia nucleosynthesis
Parikh et al (2013) , Nishimura et al. (2018)
Individual rates change, MC study
Take-home message
Combining everything we have discussed so far, a thermonuclear reaction network
is a system of ordinary coupled differential equations (ODEs), which describes
the abundance evolution (\mathbf{y}) and energy generation (\epsilon). The
main input to solve the equations is provided by the nuclear reaction rates
(except in the case of NSE) and the local thermodynamical conditions. The size
of these networks can vary according to the astrophysical environment, with
quiescent stellar burning, like the pp-chain, being much smaller compared to
explosive burning (r-process). The main computationally expensive part of
solving the network equations is to find the solution of Equation
using the Jacobian matrix.
If there is one thing you should remember from this lecture, it is the following:
Nuclear reaction networks are an indispensable tool for a nuclear astrophysicist. Learn how it works and use it to your advantage!
For the lecture slides click this link
Footnotes
Around 2% of that energy is lost by the emitted
neutrinos. This transformation is the most efficient nuclear burning
process. See a table further down for a comparison with other hydrostatic
burning processes.[↩]
In fact there are 3 distinct pp-chain branches, but we will
only discuss the first one, pp-I, which provides almost 90% of the Sun's
energy output.[↩]
The Sun is a relatively young star,
and carries in its atmosphere the signatures (elements heavier than helium) of nucleosynthesis from the stars
that lived and died in the past.[↩]
Typical event rates, using very dense
proton targets and intense proton beams, yield around one event every 6 years,
without accounting for the detection efficiency![↩]
In
case of identical particles, we can generalize Equation
to r_{ab} = \frac{n_an_b \langle \sigma v
\rangle_{ab}}{(1+\delta_{ab})},
where \delta_{ab} is the Kronecker symbol.[↩]
Remember that nuclear reactions generate energy! The
mass is not conserved, but rather the number of nucleons.[↩]
Note that this description is valid for
resonances which have approximately constant partial widths over the total
resonance with (Γ(E)/Er < 0.1, called narrow) and in addition do not
overlap significantly with other resonances (isolated)[↩]
This is the size of a typical r-process reaction network![↩]
If there are codes that I am missing, please
contact me and I will include them![↩]
References
Nuclear physics of stars[link] Iliadis, C., 2017. John Wiley & Sons.
Cauldrons in the cosmos: Nuclear astrophysics[link] Rolfs, C.E. and Rodney, W.S., 1988. University of Chicago press.
Nuclear reaction network unveils novel reaction patterns based on stellar energies Jiang, C., Szymanski, B.K., Lian, J., Havlin, S. and Gao, J., 2021. New Journal of Physics, Vol 23(8), pp. 083035. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/ac1a3d
Supernovae and nucleosynthesis: an investigation of the history of matter, from the big bang to the present[link] Arnett, D., 1996. Princeton University Press.
Thermonuclear kinetics in astrophysics Hix, W.R. and Meyer, B.S., 2006. Nuclear Physics A, Vol 777, pp. 188-207. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2004.10.009
Nucleosynthesis in thermonuclear supernovae Travaglio, C. and Raphael Hix, W., 2013. Frontiers of Physics, Vol 8, pp. 199-216. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/s11467-013-0315-y
Radiative Capture Reactions in Nuclear Astrophysics Rolfs, C. and Barnes, C., 1990. Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, Vol 40(1), pp. 45-78. Annual Reviews. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ns.40.120190.000401
Radiative capture reactions in astrophysics Brune, C.R. and Davids, B., 2015. Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, Vol 65, pp. 87-112. Annual Reviews. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102014-022027
Charged-particle thermonuclear reaction rates: I. Monte Carlo method and statistical distributions Longland, R., Iliadis, C., Champagne, A., Newton, J.R., Ugalde, C., Coc, A. and Fitzgerald, R., 2010. Nuclear Physics A, Vol 841(1-4), pp. 1-30. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2010.04.008
AZURE: An R-matrix code for nuclear astrophysics Azuma, R., Uberseder, E., Simpson, E., Brune, C., Costantini, H., De Boer, R., Gorres, J., Heil, M., LeBlanc, P., Ugalde, C. and others,, 2010. Physical Review C, Vol 81(4), pp. 045805. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.81.045805
Bayesian estimation of thermonuclear reaction rates Iliadis, C., Anderson, K., Coc, A., Timmes, F. and Starrfield, S., 2016. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 831(1), pp. 107. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/107
How Bayesian methods can improve R-matrix analyses of data: The example of the d t reaction Odell, D., Brune, C.R. and Phillips, D.R., 2022. Physical Review C, Vol 105(1), pp. 014625. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.105.014625
Computational methods for nucleosynthesis and nuclear energy generation Hix, W.R. and Thielemann, F., 1999. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Vol 109(1-2), pp. 321-351. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/S0377-0427(99)00163-6
The impact of individual nuclear properties on r-process nucleosynthesis Mumpower, M.R., Surman, R., McLaughlin, G. and Aprahamian, A., 2016. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, Vol 86, pp. 86--126. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2015.09.001
On presolar stardust grains from CO classical novae Iliadis, C., Downen, L.N., Jose, J., Nittler, L.R. and Starrfield, S., 2018. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 855(2), pp. 76. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaabb6
Nucleosynthesis in multi-dimensional SN Ia explosions Travaglio, C., Hillebrandt, W., Reinecke, M. and Thielemann, F., 2004. Astronomy \& Astrophysics, Vol 425(3), pp. 1029-1040. EDP Sciences. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041108
Synthesis of the elements within objects exploding from very high temperatures Wagoner, R.V., 1969. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 18, pp. 247. DOI: 10.1086/190191
The automatic integration of ordinary differential equations Gear, C.W., 1971. Communications of the ACM, Vol 14(3), pp. 176-179. ACM New York, NY, USA. DOI: 10.1145/362566.362571
A semi-implicit mid-point rule for stiff systems of ordinary differential equations Bader, G. and Deuflhard, P., 1983. Numerische Mathematik, Vol 41(3), pp. 373-398. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/BF01418331
Performance improvements for nuclear reaction network integration Longland, R., Martin, D. and Jose, J., 2014. Astronomy & Astrophysics, Vol 563, pp. A67. EDP Sciences. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321958
Integration of nuclear reaction networks for stellar hydrodynamics Timmes, F., 1999. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 124(1), pp. 241. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1086/313257
Stellar explosions: hydrodynamics and nucleosynthesis[link] Jose, J., 2016. CRC Press.
Nuclear robustness of the r process in neutron-star mergers de Jesus Mendoza-Temis, J., Wu, M., Langanke, K., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Bauswein, A. and Janka, H., 2015. Physical Review C, Vol 92(5), pp. 055805. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.92.055805
NuGrid stellar data set. I. Stellar yields from H to Bi for stars with metallicities Z= 0.02 and Z= 0.01 Pignatari, M., Herwig, F., Hirschi, R., Bennett, M., Rockefeller, G., Fryer, C., Timmes, F., Ritter, C., Heger, A., Jones, S. and others,, 2016. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 225(2), pp. 24. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/0067-0049/225/2/24
Following nuclei through nucleosynthesis: A novel tracing technique Sprouse, T.M., Mumpower, M.R. and Surman, R., 2021. Physical Review C, Vol 104(1), pp. 015803. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.104.015803
SkyNet: A Modular Nuclear Reaction Network Library Lippuner, J. and Roberts, L.F., 2017. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 233(2), pp. 18. DOI: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa94cb
Magnetorotationally driven supernovae as the origin of early galaxy r-process elements? Winteler, C., Kaeppeli, R., Perego, A., Arcones, A., Vasset, N., Nishimura, N., Liebendoerfer, M. and Thielemann, F., 2012. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Vol 750(1), pp. L22. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/750/1/L22
The effects of thermonuclear reaction-rate variations on nova nucleosynthesis: A sensitivity study Iliadis, C., Champagne, A., Jose, J., Starrfield, S. and Tupper, P., 2002. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 142(1), pp. 105. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1086/341400
Thermonuclear reaction rates and primordial nucleosynthesis Iliadis, C. and Coc, A., 2020. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 901(2), pp. 127. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb1a3
Uncertainties in s-process nucleosynthesis in low-mass stars determined from Monte Carlo variations Cescutti, G., Hirschi, R., Nishimura, N., Hartogh, J.d., Rauscher, T., Murphy, A.S.J. and Cristallo, S., 2018. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol 478(3), pp. 4101-4127. Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty1185
The impact of (n,γ) reaction rate uncertainties of unstable isotopes on the i-process nucleosynthesis of the elements from Ba to W Denissenkov, P.A., Herwig, F., Perdikakis, G. and Schatz, H., 2021. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol 503(3), pp. 3913-3925. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab772
Nuclear physics uncertainties in neutrino-driven, neutron-rich supernova ejecta Bliss, J., Arcones, A., Montes, F. and Pereira, J., 2020. Physical Review C, Vol 101(5), pp. 055807. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.101.055807
Constraining Nucleosynthesis in Neutrino-driven Winds: Observations, Simulations, and Nuclear Physics Psaltis, A., Arcones, A., Montes, F., Mohr, P., Hansen, C., Jacobi, M. and Schatz, H., 2022. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 935(1), pp. 27. DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7da7
Uncertainties in the νp-process: supernova dynamics versus nuclear physics Wanajo, S., Janka, H. and Kubono, S., 2011. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 729(1), pp. 46. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/729/1/46
Uncertainties in νp-process nucleosynthesis from Monte Carlo variation of reaction rates Nishimura, N., Rauscher, T., Hirschi, R., Cescutti, G., Murphy, A.S.J. and Frohlich, C., 2019. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol 489(1), pp. 1379-1396. Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stz2104
Fission and the r-process nucleosynthesis of translead nuclei in neutron star mergers Giuliani, S.A., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Wu, M. and Robledo, L.M., 2020. Physical Review C, Vol 102(4), pp. 045804. APS. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.102.045804
Markov chain Monte Carlo predictions of neutron-rich lanthanide properties as a probe of r-process dynamics Vassh, N., McLaughlin, G.C., Mumpower, M.R. and Surman, R., 2021. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 907(2), pp. 98. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd035
Sensitivity of p-Process Nucleosynthesis to Nuclear Reaction Rates in a 25 M☉ Supernova Model Rapp, W., Gorres, J., Wiescher, M., Schatz, H. and Kappeler, F., 2006. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 653(1), pp. 474. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1086/508402
Uncertainties in the production of p nuclei in massive stars obtained from Monte Carlo variations Rauscher, T., Nishimura, N., Hirschi, R., Cescutti, G., Murphy, A.S.J. and Heger, A., 2016. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol 463(4), pp. 4153-4166. The Royal Astronomical Society. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw2266
The effects of variations in nuclear processes on type I X-ray burst nucleosynthesis Parikh, A., Jose, J., Moreno, F. and Iliadis, C., 2008. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Vol 178(1), pp. 110. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1086/589879
Dependence of X-ray burst models on nuclear reaction rates Cyburt, R., Amthor, A., Heger, A., Johnson, E., Keek, L., Meisel, Z., Schatz, H. and Smith, K., 2016. The Astrophysical Journal, Vol 830(2), pp. 55. IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/55
The effects of variations in nuclear interactions on nucleosynthesis in thermonuclear supernovae Parikh, A., Jose, J., Seitenzahl, I.R. and Ropke, F.K., 2013. Astronomy & Astrophysics, Vol 557, pp. A3. EDP Sciences. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321518
Uncertainties in the production of p nuclides in thermonuclear supernovae determined by Monte Carlo variations Nishimura, N., Rauscher, T., Hirschi, R., Murphy, A.S.J., Cescutti, G. and Travaglio, C., 2018. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol 474(3), pp. 3133-3139. Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx3033