MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972281583 · doi:10.1126/science.1098836

The Cometary and Interstellar Dust Analyzer at Comet 81P/Wild 2

2004· article· en· W1972281583 on OpenAlexaff
J. Kissel, F. R. Krueger, J. Silén, B. C. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCometAstrobiologyCosmic dustSulfurIonPhysicsMass spectrometryNitrogenPolyatomic ionHydrogenChemistrySpectral lineCarbon monoxideInterstellar cometAstronomyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CIDA (Cometary and Interstellar Dust Analyzer) instrument on the Stardust spacecraft is a time-of-flight mass spectrometer used to analyze ions formed when fast dust particles strike the instrument's target. In the spectra of 45 presumably interstellar particles, quinone derivates were identified as constituents in the organic component. The 29 spectra obtained during the flyby of Comet 81P/Wild 2 confirm the predominance of organic matter. In moving from interstellar to cometary dust, the organic material seems to lose most of its hydrogen and oxygen as water and carbon monoxide. These are now present in the comet as gas phases, whereas the dust is rich in nitrogen-containing species. No traces of amino acids were found. We detected sulfur ions in one spectrum, which suggests that sulfur species are important in cometary organics.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations139
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207