MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000287395 · doi:10.1029/2004je002237

An igneous origin for features of a candidate crater‐lake system in western Memnonia, Mars

2004· article· en· W2000287395 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Leverington, T. A. Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsImpact craterGeologyLavaVolcanoMars Exploration ProgramMartianIgneous rockCrater lakeTerrace (agriculture)GeomorphologySubsidenceGeochemistryAstrobiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association of channels, inner terraces, and delta‐like features with Martian impact craters has previously been interpreted as evidence in favor of the past existence of crater lakes on Mars. However, examination of a candidate crater‐lake system in western Memnonia suggests instead that its features may have formed through igneous processes involving the flow and ponding of lava. Accumulations of material in craters and other topographic lows throughout much of the study region have characteristics consistent with those of volcanic deposits, and terraces found along the inner flanks of some of these craters are interpreted as having formed through drainage or subsidence of volcanic materials. Channels previously identified as inlets and outlets of the crater‐lake system are interpreted instead as volcanic rilles. These results challenge previous interpretations of terrace and channel features in the study region and suggest that candidate crater lakes located elsewhere should be reexamined.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations55
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207