Evidence for water ice near the lunar poles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improved versions of Lunar Prospector thermal and epithermal neutron data were studied to help discriminate between potential delivery and retention mechanisms for hydrogen on the Moon. Improved spatial resolution at both poles shows that the largest concentrations of hydrogen overlay regions in permanent shade. In the north these regions consist of a heavily cratered terrain containing many small (less than ∼10‐km diameter), isolated craters. These border circular areas of hydrogen abundance ([H]) that is only modestly enhanced above the average equatorial value but that falls within large, flat‐bottomed, and sunlit polar craters. Near the south pole, [H] is enhanced within several 30‐km‐scale craters that are in permanent shade but is only modestly enhanced within their sunlit neighbors. We show that delivery by the solar wind cannot account for these observations because the diffusivity of hydrogen at the temperatures within both sunlit and permanently shaded craters near both poles is sufficiently low that a solar wind origin cannot explain their differences. We conclude that a significant portion of the enhanced hydrogen near both poles is most likely in the form of water molecules.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it