MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038565365 · doi:10.1002/xrs.914

Calibration of the MER α‐particle x‐ray spectrometer for detection of ‘invisible’ OH and H <sub>2</sub> O possibly present in Martian rocks and soils

2006· article· en· W2038565365 on OpenAlexafffund
Christiane L. Mallett, J. M. O’Meara, J.A. Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueX-Ray Spectrometry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMartianCalibrationMars Exploration ProgramSpectrometerPhysicsMartian surfaceMineralogyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceOpticsGeologyChemistryAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An existing Monte Carlo code was modified and extended to predict the intensity ratio of elastically and inelastically scattered plutonium Lα x‐rays incident on rock samples in the Mars Exploration Rover's α‐particle x‐ray spectrometer (APXS) device. The systematics of the scatter ratio as a function of effective sample atomic number are explored. The simulated Rayleigh/Compton ratios (R/C) sim are compared with measured ratios (R/C) meas that are obtained by fitting APXS spectra of geochemical reference materials using an x‐ray fluorescence version of GUPIX. The quantity K = (R/C) meas /(R/C) sim is then plotted against the mean atomic number of the sample to provide a calibration for known samples. Departures of K values of unknown samples from this calibration may then be attributed to the presence of light, ‘invisible’ elements in the sample. This work is part of an ongoing project aimed at developing methods to quantify bound water in Martian rocks analyzed by the present and the next generation APXS instruments. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueX-Ray SpectrometrySame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207