MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907361392

Diagenetic Crystal Clusters and Dendrites, Lower Mount Sharp, Gale Crater

2015· article· en· W1907361392 on OpenAlexaff
Linda C. Kah, R. E. Kronyak, Jason Van Beek, M. Nachon, N. Mangold, L. M. Thompson, R. C. Wiens, J. P. Grotzinger, Jack D. Farmer, M. E. Minitti, J. Shieber, Dorothy Z. Oehler

Bibliographic record

VenueLunar and Planetary Science Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDiagenesisFaciesPaleontologySedimentary depositional environmentStratigraphic unitImpact craterVolcanoGeochemistryGeomorphologySedimentary rockStructural basinAstrobiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since approximately Sol 753 (to sol 840+) the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover has been investigating the Pahrump locality. Mapping of HiRise images suggests that the Pahrup locality represents the first occurrence of strata associated with basal Mount Sharp. Considerable efforts have been made to document the Pahrump locality in detail, in order to constrain both depositional and diagenetic facies. The Pahrump succession consists of approximately 13 meters of recessive-weathering mudstone interbedded with thin (decimeter-scale) intervals of more erosionally resistant mudstone, and crossbedded sandstone in the upper stratigraphic levels. Mudstone textures vary from massive, to poorly laminated, to well-laminated. Here we investigate the distribution and structure of unusual diagenetic features that occur in the lowermost portion of the Pahrump section. These diagenetic features consist of three dimensional crystal clusters and dendrites that are erosionally resistant with respect to the host rock.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLunar and Planetary Science ConferenceSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207