Gone with the wind: Eolian erasure of the Mars Rover tracks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wheel tracks left by the Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity are unique artificial markings on the surface of Mars. The tracks stretch several kilometers across diverse terrain in two widely separated regions of the planet. The initial appearance and characteristics of the tracks were well documented by the science and navigation cameras aboard the vehicles at the time the tracks were formed. Orbital observations by Mars Global Surveyor and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter document the erasure of the tracks over a period of more than 2 Mars years. Close‐up examinations of track crossings, where the rovers encountered tracks made hundreds of Martian solar days earlier, provide insights into the mechanisms and time scales of eolian alteration on Mars. These observations suggest that fallout of atmospheric dust plays only a minor role in obscuring rover tracks over time. Instead, track erasure is dominated by sediment that is transported by surface winds. Both deposition and erosion act to erase the rover tracks. The length scales for eolian sediment transport are hundreds of meters at least, much larger than the size of the tracks. Gradual processes such as dust devils and sand saltation have minor effects that can nonetheless erase rover tracks over long time periods. However, short‐lived strong wind events associated with seasonal dust storms have much more pronounced effects, significantly altering the tracks on time scales of days. These episodic strong winds tend to occur annually during the perihelion season. The time scale for track erasure is typically only 1 Martian year.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".