Experimental and theoretical simulation of sublimating dusty water ice with implications for D/H ratios of water ice on Comets and Mars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sublimation experiments have been carried out to determine the effect of the mineral dust content of porous ices on the isotopic composition of the sublimate gas over medium (days to weeks) timescales. Whenever mineral dust of any kind was present, the D/H ratio of the sublimated gas was seen to decrease with time from the bulk ratio. Fractionations of up to 2.5 were observed for dust mixing ratios of 9 wt% and higher of JSC MARS-1 regolith simulant 1-10 μm crushed and sieved fraction. These favored the presence of the light isotope, H 2 O, in the gas phase. The more dust was added to the mixture, the more pronounced was this effect. Theoretical modeling of gas migration within the porous samples and adsorption on the excavated dust grains was undertaken to explain the results. Adsorption onto the dust grains is able to explain the low D/H ratios in the sublimate gas if adsorption favors retention of HDO over H 2 O. This leads to significant isotopic enrichment of HDO on the dust over time and depletion in the amount of HDO escaping the system as sublimate gas. This effect is significant for planetary bodies on which water moves mainly through the gas phase and a significant surface reservoir of dust may be found, such as on Comets and Mars. For each of these, inferences about the bulk water D/H ratio as inferred from gas phase measurements needs to be reassessed in light of the volatile cycling history of each body. 98.80.Ft [Isotopes, abundances and evolution (astronomy)], 64.70.Hz [Sublimation], 68.43.-h [Adsorption at solid surfaces]
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".