From: Matteo Dell'O. <mat...@fa...> - 2017-03-28 15:04:17
|
Dear All, I'm performing some basic comparisons in order to extend (using MESA r9575) a dataset computed by means of MESA r8118. I'm noticing some differences in the evolutionary timescale between the two releases. The case study I'd like to discuss is M = 1.40 Msun, Z = 0.01894, Y = 0.2674. The inlist for the computations are attached to this message (inlist, inlist_default, and inlist-nr) [the control photo_interval in r9575 replaces the old photosteps], as well as the .net adopted. It turns out that the stellar evolution computed by r9575 is 2% faster than the one by r8118 (see attached plots). This is a very notable difference -- all input being the same -- and it will have a relevant impact on grid-based estimates of stellar mass, radius, and age. I've no clue to trace the origin of the difference, since the release notes do not highlight some changes which could alter so much the evolutionary timescale. Could someone help by pointing out the changes (algorithms or default values) occurred between the two versions? Thanks in advance, Matteo Dell'Omodarme Sezione di Astronomia Università di Pisa |
From: Pablo M. <pa...@gm...> - 2017-03-28 15:38:38
|
Hi Matteo, my first recommendation would be to check for convergence of your models. Using the same version of MESA, do you get the same lifetime if you increase resolution by two and decrease your timesteps by a similar factor? How many steps are you using to model the main sequence. At this mass in particular you could be getting a small convective core as well. Depending on your treatment of the convective boundary this can cause odd discrepancies. You can for instance make some Kippenhahn plots to check for this, either using the options available on PGSTAR for that, or some python tools developed by some of us https://github.com/orlox/mkipp https://github.com/rjfarmer/mesaplot In particular I'd recommend you use the Ledoux criterion with semiconvection, by setting use_ledoux_criterion = .true. alpha_semiconvection = 1d0 Cheers On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Matteo Dell'Omodarme <mat...@fa... > wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm performing some basic comparisons in order to extend (using MESA > r9575) a > dataset computed by means of MESA r8118. > I'm noticing some differences in the evolutionary timescale between the two > releases. > > The case study I'd like to discuss is M = 1.40 Msun, Z = 0.01894, Y = > 0.2674. > The inlist for the computations are attached to this message (inlist, > inlist_default, and inlist-nr) [the control photo_interval in r9575 > replaces > the old photosteps], as well as the .net adopted. > > It turns out that the stellar evolution computed by r9575 is 2% faster than > the one by r8118 (see attached plots). This is a very notable difference -- > all input being the same -- and it > will have a relevant impact on grid-based estimates of stellar mass, > radius, and age. > > I've no clue to trace the origin of the difference, since the release > notes do > not highlight some changes which could alter so much the evolutionary > timescale. > > Could someone help by pointing out the changes (algorithms or default > values) occurred between the two versions? > > Thanks in advance, > Matteo Dell'Omodarme > > Sezione di Astronomia > Università di Pisa > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > mesa-users mailing list > mes...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users > > -- Pablo Marchant Campos M.Sc on Astrophysics, Universidad Católica de Chile PhD student, Argelander-Institut für Astronomie |
From: Aaron D. <aar...@gm...> - 2017-03-28 17:25:27
|
Hi Matteo, Somewhere between r8118 and r9575 there was a change to the internal EOS code that switched from cubic to linear interpolation in X. I was able to reproduce your results between 8118 and 9575 by switching back and forth between linear and cubic interpolation in the EOS. Can you continue to use r8118? If not, you might want to wait for the next public release and update again. Aaron On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Matteo Dell'Omodarme <mat...@fa... > wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm performing some basic comparisons in order to extend (using MESA > r9575) a > dataset computed by means of MESA r8118. > I'm noticing some differences in the evolutionary timescale between the two > releases. > > The case study I'd like to discuss is M = 1.40 Msun, Z = 0.01894, Y = > 0.2674. > The inlist for the computations are attached to this message (inlist, > inlist_default, and inlist-nr) [the control photo_interval in r9575 > replaces > the old photosteps], as well as the .net adopted. > > It turns out that the stellar evolution computed by r9575 is 2% faster than > the one by r8118 (see attached plots). This is a very notable difference -- > all input being the same -- and it > will have a relevant impact on grid-based estimates of stellar mass, > radius, and age. > > I've no clue to trace the origin of the difference, since the release > notes do > not highlight some changes which could alter so much the evolutionary > timescale. > > Could someone help by pointing out the changes (algorithms or default > values) occurred between the two versions? > > Thanks in advance, > Matteo Dell'Omodarme > > Sezione di Astronomia > Università di Pisa > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > mesa-users mailing list > mes...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users > > |
From: Matteo Dell'O. <mat...@fa...> - 2017-03-29 07:21:03
|
Hi Aaron, thanks for the quick reply. Indeed this is an impressive demonstration of how our age estimates are prone to systematic effects due to the choices we made internally in our codes! Cheers Matteo On 03/28/2017 07:25 PM, Aaron Dotter wrote: > Hi Matteo, > > Somewhere between r8118 and r9575 there was a change to the internal > EOS code that switched from cubic to linear interpolation in X. > > I was able to reproduce your results between 8118 and 9575 by > switching back and forth between linear and cubic interpolation in the > EOS. > > Can you continue to use r8118? If not, you might want to wait for the > next public release and update again. > > Aaron > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Matteo Dell'Omodarme > <mat...@fa... <mailto:mat...@fa...>> wrote: > > Dear All, > > I'm performing some basic comparisons in order to extend (using > MESA r9575) a > dataset computed by means of MESA r8118. > I'm noticing some differences in the evolutionary timescale > between the two > releases. > > The case study I'd like to discuss is M = 1.40 Msun, Z = 0.01894, Y = > 0.2674. > The inlist for the computations are attached to this message (inlist, > inlist_default, and inlist-nr) [the control photo_interval in > r9575 replaces > the old photosteps], as well as the .net adopted. > > It turns out that the stellar evolution computed by r9575 is 2% > faster than > the one by r8118 (see attached plots). This is a very notable > difference -- > all input being the same -- and it > will have a relevant impact on grid-based estimates of stellar mass, > radius, and age. > > I've no clue to trace the origin of the difference, since the > release notes do > not highlight some changes which could alter so much the > evolutionary timescale. > > Could someone help by pointing out the changes (algorithms or default > values) occurred between the two versions? > > Thanks in advance, > Matteo Dell'Omodarme > > Sezione di Astronomia > Università di Pisa > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > mesa-users mailing list > mes...@li... > <mailto:mes...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users > <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users> > > |