Comparison of structures in zircons from lunar and terrestrial impactitesThis article is one of a series of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme of <i>Geochronology</i> in honour of Tom Krogh.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There have been a number of reports of the presence of shock features, such as planar fracturing and granulation, the transformation of zircon to reidite, and the breakdown of zircon to baddeleyite in zircons associated with terrestrial impacts. It has also been proposed that the progressive development of these shock features, and the degree of disturbance of the zircon U–Pb isotopic system, could be used as a qualitative measure of the shock pressures and post-shock temperatures of the impact. Such behaviour of zircon from terrestrial impacts could be potentially useful in interpreting structures and U–Pb isotopic behaviour of shocked zircons from lunar impactites. However, careful examination of over one hundred zircon grains from samples of lunar breccias from Apollo 14 and 17 have not revealed any grains with terrestrial-like shock features, such as planar deformation features (PDFs), and we have not observed the high-pressure zircon phases reidite or the breakdown of zircon to baddeleyite in zircon grains from the breccias. Most lunar zircon grains show no evidence of a disturbance of their U–Pb systems. However, we have identified a few zircons from lunar breccias that have characteristic internal structures and accompanying Pb loss that we attribute to extreme shock. These structures differ from shock features reported for zircons associated with terrestrial impacts. Whether terrestrial-like impact features were present in the lunar zircons and have been removed during transport and heating in the impact ejecta, or whether these features never developed in the first place, has not been resolved.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".