MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146878872 · doi:10.1002/jgre.20155

Ice nucleation by surrogates of Martian mineral dust: What can we learn about Mars without leaving Earth?

2013· article· en· W2146878872 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Cziczo, Sarvesh Garimella, Michael Raddatz, Kristina Hoehler, Martin Schnaiter, Harald Saathoff, O. Moehler, Jonathan P. D. Abbatt, Luis A. Ladino

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Planets · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsAtmosphere of MarsMars Exploration ProgramCirrusMartianAstrobiologyAtmospheric sciencesIce nucleusIce cloudAtmosphere (unit)Environmental scienceGeologyNucleationMeteorologyChemistryPhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Water and carbon dioxide ice clouds have been observed in the Martian atmosphere where they are dynamic parts of that planet's water and carbon cycles. Many Martian atmospheric models struggle to correctly predict clouds and, with insufficient data, some use untested simplifications that cloud formation occurs exactly at the saturation point of the condensed phase or at the same conditions as terrestrial cirrus clouds. To address the lack of data, we have utilized an 84 m 3 cloud chamber built for studies of high altitude cirrus and polar stratospheric ice clouds in the Earth's atmosphere and adapted to Martian conditions. Using this chamber, we have been able to produce water ice clouds from aerosol in an inert and low pressure atmosphere mimicking that of Mars. At temperatures between 189 and 215 K, we investigated cloud formation by mineral dust particulates of a similar composition and size to those found on Mars. We show that these surrogate materials nucleate effectively at the higher temperatures, with minor temperature dependence at saturations ratios with respect to the ice phase of ~1.1, similar to what has been found for terrestrial cirrus. At the lower end of the temperature range, this saturation rises to ~1.9, a result consistent with previous studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research PlanetsSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207