You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: docs/source/changelog.rst
+63-5Lines changed: 63 additions & 5 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -21,10 +21,9 @@ New Features
21
21
``max_allowed_nz`` is now ignored if the value is less than or equal to zero.
22
22
23
23
Kap
24
-
~~~~~
24
+
~~~
25
25
26
-
`High Temperature Opacity Tables`
27
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
26
+
**High Temperature Opacity Tables**
28
27
29
28
Type 1 Rosseland-mean opacity tables from The Los Alamos
30
29
OPLIB database (`Colgan et al. 2016 <https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...817..116C/abstract>`_) are now available (Farag et al. 2024).
@@ -52,8 +51,8 @@ implementation of these tables. For further details on these new OPLIB opacity t
52
51
the Type 1 OPAL/OP tables as well as their effect on solar models can be found in
53
52
in Farag et al. 2024.
54
53
55
-
`Low Temperature Opacity Tables`
56
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
54
+
55
+
**Low Temperature Opacity Tables**
57
56
58
57
Low temperature Rosseland-mean opacity tables for both (`AAG21, Asplund et al. 2021 <https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A%26A...653A.141A/abstract>`_),
59
58
and (`MB22, Magg et al. 2022 <https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202142971>`_)
@@ -65,6 +64,65 @@ options for :ref:`kap/defaults:kap_lowT_prefix`:
65
64
+ ``'lowT_fa05_mb22'``
66
65
+ ``'lowT_fa05_aag21'``
67
66
67
+
**Opacity interpolation**
68
+
69
+
We have updated the opacity interpolation scheme to provide much higher quality derivatives when doing cubic interpolation
70
+
in composition.
71
+
72
+
MESA interpolates across opacity tables in the :math:`X–Z` plane through the use of two consequtive 1D splines.
73
+
MESA offers users the ability to choose linear or cubic interpolation for these splines,
74
+
while leaving the default as linear interpolation::
75
+
76
+
cubic_interpolation_in_X = .false.
77
+
cubic_interpolation_in_Z = .false.
78
+
79
+
This choice of default was primarily due to the fact that
80
+
the previous cubic composition interpolation scheme in MESA suffered from poor quality interpolated opacity derivatives with respect to
81
+
density and temperature, which often disagreed with the numerical derivatives produced via nearest neighbor
82
+
Richardson extrapolation. The figure below shows this comparison on a logarithmic scale, where in general red indicates poor quality
83
+
derivatives and blue indicates high quality derivatives.
This figure shows the logarithmic relative error in the derivative :math:`\partial \kappa / \partial T` (:math:`X` = 0.625, :math:`Z` = 0.015),
89
+
for an OPAL opacity table grid using Grevesse & Sauval (1998) abundances, generated from MESA’s kap module, using the previous cubic interpolation scheme.
90
+
The OPLIB log(:math:`R`) = −8, 1.5 table boundaries are marked with a solid black line and the OPAL/OP log(:math:`R`) = 1.0 boundary is shown with a dashed line.
91
+
The approximate location of the Z-dependent transition to an electron conduction dominated opacity is marked with dot-dash blue curve.
92
+
Regions for Atomic, molecular, and compton scattering opacity are labeled and presented with their associated blending regions.
93
+
94
+
95
+
While the opacity derivatives do not directly appear in the canonical equations of stellar structure, they do appear in the Jacobian matrix for MESA's implicit solver.
96
+
Numerically unstable opacity derivatives can halt the progress of the solver and ultimately crash a calculation.
97
+
98
+
To improve the numerical stability of MESA's cubic opacity interpolation routines, we have implemented
99
+
automatic differentiation into the opacity interpolating functions. Now, when using cubic interpolation, the opacity derivatives for an arbitrary mixture
100
+
in the :math:`X–Z` plane are computed by taking the derivative of the interpolating function as opposed to the interpolant of the derivatives. This improvement
101
+
has led to a significant reduction in the relative derivative error and an increase in the numerical accuracy of opacity derivatives computed with cubic interpolation.
Same as previous figure, but for new cubic interpolation scheme taking advantage of automatic differentiation.
107
+
108
+
109
+
This new implementation of cubic interpolation in composition for opacity tables comes close to achieving the derivative quality of the linear interpolation
110
+
option (shown below), while also providing more accurate opacity physics between opacity table grid points.
Same as previous figure, but for linear interpolation instead of cubic.
116
+
117
+
118
+
For this MESA release, linear interpolation remains the default method for interpolating in composition between opacity tables
119
+
while we continue to investigate the residual areas where cubic interpolation appears to occasionally produce lower quality derivatives.
120
+
However, adopting cubic interpolation has been shown to consistently increase the overall
121
+
opacity of a model, and can directly effect the structure of solar models, see Appendix B & C in Farag et al. 2024.
122
+
We anticipate making cubic interpolation the default in a future MESA release version.
123
+
We encourage users to experiment with these different opacity interpolation routines and be mindful of the effect they can have on their stellar models.
124
+
125
+
68
126
Chem
69
127
~~~~~
70
128
New initial metal mass fractions ``initial_zfracs`` taken from photospheric estimates of the solar heavy element abundances in (AAG21, Asplund et al. 2021) and (MB22, Magg et al. 2022)
0 commit comments