MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2044910357 · doi:10.1029/2000jb900222

Three‐dimensional magnetic imaging of the Chicxulub Crater

2000· article· en· W2044910357 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Pilkington, A. R. Hildebrand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpact craterGeologyBrecciaEvaporiteGeophysicsMagnetic anomalyMagnetizationPetrologyGeomorphologySedimentary rockSeismologyGeochemistryMagnetic fieldAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although few magnetization measurements are available for the structural elements of the Chicxulub impact crater, the magnetization intensities of the melt sheet, upper breccia unit, and central uplift are 3–4 orders of magnitude greater than the 3‐ to 4‐km‐thick carbonate and evaporite stratigraphy covering the Yucatan block. This allows three‐dimensional modeling of the crater's structure by inversion using a two‐layer model. Two layers are separately inverted by dividing the crater's magnetic field expression into <40‐ and >40‐km wavelength components. The upper layer (average depth 2 km) models the distribution of highly‐magnetized zones in the crater's melt sheet. The lower layer (average depth 5 km) represents relief on the Yucatan block's basement surface and effectively maps the crater's ∼50‐km‐diameter central uplift and possibly the expression of the surrounding collapsed disruption cavity fill. The shallower magnetized zones consist of two generally concentric distributions, at radii of ∼20 and ∼45 km. These highly magnetized zones are thought to result from hydrothermal systems, localized at the edge of the central uplift and the collapsed disruption cavity, having produced magnetic phases during alteration of the melt sheet.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations60
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→