MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1654913307

Dating the Earliest Solids in our Solar System

2002· article· en· W1654913307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander N. Krot

Bibliographic record

Venuepsrd · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChondruleChondriteAstrobiologyMeteoriteSolar SystemGeologyPlanetary scienceAsteroidGeochemistryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Written by Alexander N. Krot Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology Chondritic meteorites (chondrites), the oldest rocks in our solar system, provide a significant record of the processes that transformed a disk of gas and dust into a collection of planets, moons, asteroids, and comets. They are considered to be the building blocks of the inner planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars. Chondrites are aggregates of three major components: refractory Ca-Al-rich inclusions (CAIs), less refractory ferromagnesian silicate spherules called chondrules, and a fine-grained matrix. We know that CAIs and chondrules formed at nearly the same time as the Sun (4.56 billion years ago), but we don't know the details of how or where the CAIs and chondrules formed. The timing and duration of their formation remains obscure. My colleagues, Yuri Amelin (Royal Ontario Museum), Ian Hutcheon (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory), Alexander Ulyanov (Moscow State University), and I set out to resolve these unknowns by determining the absolute formation ages of CAIs and chondrules using lead isotopic analyses.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuepsrdSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207