MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035566318 · doi:10.1111/maps.12381

Revisiting the Rochechouart impact structure, France

2014· article· en· W2035566318 on OpenAlexaff
H. M. Sapers, G. R. Osinski, Neil R. Banerjee, L. Ferrière, P. Lambert, M. R. M. Izawa

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteoritics and Planetary Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegMcGill UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyImpact structureBrecciaPetrographyImpact craterClastic rockGeochemistryLithologyCarbonatePaleontologySedimentary rock

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Rochechouart impact structure, south‐central France (45o50′N, 0o46′E), is a partly eroded, approximately 200 Myr, complex impact structure. The impactite suite at Rochechouart provides an excellent example of gradational boundaries and transitional lithologies that have been historically difficult to classify with standard impactite nomenclature. Here, we present the first detailed scanning electron microscopy‐based description of the Rochechouart impactites integrated with hand‐sample and petrographic observations with the goal of understanding the clast‐matrix relationships of transitional lithologies. Three main impact‐generated hydrothermal alteration assemblages are also recognized: (1) argillic‐like, (2) carbonate, and (3) oxide. Our results support the existence of a continuum between clast‐rich impact melt rocks and glass‐rich clastic breccias (suevites) that must be represented in universal classification schemes. This suite of impactites from the Rochechouart impact structure is used as a test case for a recently published classification scheme based on the nature of the groundmass setting a precedent for classification of impactites with limited to no geological context such as deeply eroded terrestrial impact structures and future sample return missions. The re‐evaluation of the melt‐bearing Rochechouart impactites questions the currently accepted size of the crater, suggesting a much larger original crater diameter.

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)0.001
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 score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeteoritics and Planetary ScienceSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207