  Solar models using the new lower abundances of Asplund et al. (2005, 2009) or
Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) do not agree as well with helioseismic inferences as
models that use the higher Grevesse & Noels (1993) or Grevesse & Sauval (1998)
abundances. Adopting the new abundances leads to models with sound speed
discrepancies of up to 1.4$%$ below the base of the convection zone (compared
to discrepancies of less than 0.4$%$ with the old abundances), a convection
zone that is too shallow, and a convection zone helium abundance that is too
low. Here we review briefly recent attempts to restore agreement, and we
evaluate three changes to the models: early mass loss, accretion of low-Z
material, and convective overshoot. One goal of these attempts is to explore
models that could preserve the structure in the interior obtained with the old
abundances while accommodating the new abundances at the surface. Although the
mass-losing and accretion models show some improvement in agreement with
seismic constraints, a satisfactory resolution to the solar abundance problem
remains to be found. In addition, we perform a preliminary analysis of models
with the Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) abundances that shows that the sound speed
discrepancy is reduced to only about 0.6$%$ at the convection zone base,
compared to 1.4$%$ for the Asplund et al. (2005) abundances and 0.4$%$ for the
Grevesse & Noels (1993) abundances. Furthermore, including mass loss in models
with the Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) abundances may improve sound speed
agreement and help resolve the solar lithium problem.
