MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W105244507

Perennial mounds in Utopia Planitia: (HiRISE) Evidence of a Glacial Origin

2009· article· en· W105244507 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. J. Soare, G. R. Osinski, Laura Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueLPI · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPermafrostGlacial periodThermokarstMars Exploration ProgramAggradationAmazonianEarth scienceGeomorphologyPhysical geographyGeochemistryPaleontologyFluvialAstrobiologyOceanographyAmazon rainforest
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: “Closed” pingos are perennial icecored mounds that are formed by hydrostatic (porewater) pressure induced by localised permafrost aggradation (Fig. 1). These mounds are commonplace features of periglacial landscapes on Earth such as the Tuktoyaktuk Coastlands of northern Canada. A number of studies have reported the occurrence of mounds in the middle to northern latitudes of Utopia Planitia (UP), Mars, whose morphology, size and geological characteristics summit cracks and raised (collapselike) rims are suggestive of terrestrial pingos [1-6]. The mounds and the geological units upon which they reside are thought to be youthful, having formed in the late Amazonian period [7-11]. At least on Earth, the formation of closed pingos requires the presence of ponded water, soil saturation to metres of depth and the development of an ice core from injected and subsequently frozen pore-water [1213]. Were the occurrence of pingos on Mars to be confirmed, current hypotheses about “dry” periglacial or glacial processes dominating relatively recent landscape modifications in UP [9,13] might have to be revised.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLPISame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207