MAHLI at the Rocknest sand shadow: Science and science‐enabling activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During Martian solar days 57–100, the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover acquired and processed a solid (sediment) sample and analyzed its mineralogy and geochemistry with the Chemistry and Mineralogy and Sample Analysis at Mars instruments. An aeolian deposit—herein referred to as the Rocknest sand shadow—was inferred to represent a global average soil composition and selected for study to facilitate integration of analytical results with observations from earlier missions. During first‐time activities, the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) was used to support both science and engineering activities related to sample assessment, collection, and delivery. Here we report on MAHLI activities that directly supported sample analysis and provide MAHLI observations regarding the grain‐scale characteristics of the Rocknest sand shadow. MAHLI imaging confirms that the Rocknest sand shadow is one of a family of bimodal aeolian accumulations on Mars—similar to the coarse‐grained ripples interrogated by the Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity—in which a surface veneer of coarse‐grained sediment stabilizes predominantly fine‐grained sediment of the deposit interior. The similarity in grain size distribution of these geographically disparate deposits support the widespread occurrence of bimodal aeolian transport on Mars. We suggest that preservation of bimodal aeolian deposits may be characteristic of regions of active deflation, where winnowing of the fine‐sediment fraction results in a relatively low sediment load and a preferential increase in the coarse‐grained fraction of the sediment load. The compositional similarity of Martian aeolian deposits supports the potential for global redistribution of fine‐grained components, combined with potential local contributions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".