Gravity analysis of Parga and Hecate chasmata: Implications for rift and corona formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The two largest rift systems on Venus, Parga, and Hecate chasmata contain one third of all coronae. We map variations in elastic thickness and apparent depth of compensation (ADC) in these two regions using the admittance function for gravity and topography. We examine the relationship between rifting and coronae by comparing lithospheric structure with corona characteristics including volcanism, topographic shape, fracture pattern, diameter, and stratigraphic age. At Hecate chasmata, both ADC and elastic thickness correlate with two main rift branches, the fracture style and corona characteristics. Hecate chasma thus appears to be dominated by extensional processes. Parga chasma shows little correlation between lithospheric properties and the location of coronae or rift segments. The ADC at Hecate and Parga chasmata is mostly less than 75–100 km, implying that there is not large‐scale upwelling underlying the rift systems. The variations in the corona population sizes between Parga chasma, which has 131 coronae, and Hecate chasma, with 50 coronae, suggest differences in the evolution of the two rift systems. The much larger population of coronae at Parga contains more small coronae, many of which have relatively low volcanism and post date the rift. Further, many of the small coronae occur in chains and have similar diameters, as predicted by Rayleigh‐Taylor type instabilities. These characteristics suggest that the smaller coronae may form via a later, secondary decompression melting phase. Thus, Hecate chasma may be younger than Parga chasma and could experience a secondary stage of corona formation in the future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".