MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098392305 · doi:10.1126/science.1220476

Ancient Impact and Aqueous Processes at Endeavour Crater, Mars

2012· article· en· W2098392305 on OpenAlexaff
S. W. Squyres, R. E. Arvidson, J. F. Bell, F. J. Calef, B. C. Clark, B. A. Cohen, Larry Crumpler, Paulo de Souza, W. H. Farrand, R. Gellert, J. A. Grant, K. E. Herkenhoff, J. A. Hurowitz, J. R. Johnson, B. L. Jolliff, Andrew H. Knoll, R. Li, S. M. McLennan, D. W. Ming, David W. Mittlefehldt, T. J. Parker, G. Paulsen, M. S. Rice, S. W. Ruff, Christian Schröder, A. S. Yen, K. Zacny

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramImpact craterAstrobiologyGeologyEarth scienceExploration of MarsEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rover Opportunity has investigated the rim of Endeavour Crater, a large ancient impact crater on Mars. Basaltic breccias produced by the impact form the rim deposits, with stratigraphy similar to that observed at similar-sized craters on Earth. Highly localized zinc enrichments in some breccia materials suggest hydrothermal alteration of rim deposits. Gypsum-rich veins cut sedimentary rocks adjacent to the crater rim. The gypsum was precipitated from low-temperature aqueous fluids flowing upward from the ancient materials of the rim, leading temporarily to potentially habitable conditions and providing some of the waters involved in formation of the ubiquitous sulfate-rich sandstones of the Meridiani region.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations192
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207