On pressure measurement and seasonal pressure variations during the Phoenix mission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In situ surface pressures measured at 2 s intervals during the 150 sol Phoenix mission are presented and seasonal variations discussed. The lightweight Barocap®/Thermocap® pressure sensor system performed moderately well. However, the original data processing routine had problems because the thermal environment of the sensor was subject to more rapid variations than had been expected. Hence, the data processing routine was updated after Phoenix landed. Further evaluation and the development of a correction are needed since the temperature dependences of the Barocap sensor heads have drifted after the calibration of the sensor. The inaccuracy caused by this appears when the temperature of the unit rises above 0°C. This frequently affects data in the afternoons and precludes a full study of diurnal pressure variations at this time. Short‐term fluctuations, on time scales of order 20 s are unaffected and are reported in a separate paper in this issue. Seasonal variations are not significantly affected by this problem and show general agreement with previous measurements from Mars. During the 151 sol mission the surface pressure dropped from around 860 Pa to a minimum (daily average) of 724 Pa on sol 140 (Ls 143). This local minimum occurred several sols earlier than expected based on GCM studies and Viking data. Since battery power was lost on sol 151 we are not sure if the timing of the minimum that we saw could have been advanced by a low‐pressure meteorological event. On sol 95 (Ls 122), we also saw a relatively low‐pressure feature. This was accompanied by a large number of vertical vortex events, characterized by short, localized (in time), low‐pressure perturbations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".