NATURE’S STARSHIPS. II. SIMULATING THE SYNTHESIS OF AMINO ACIDS IN METEORITE PARENT BODIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbonaceous chondrite meteorites are known for having high water and organic material contents, including amino acids. Here we address the origin of amino acids in the warm interiors of their parent bodies (planetesimals) within a few million years of their formation, and connect this with the astrochemistry of their natal protostellar disks. We compute both the total amino acid abundance pattern as well as the relative frequencies of amino acids within the CM2 (e.g. Murchison) and CR2 chondrite subclasses based on Strecker reactions within these bodies. We match the relative frequencies to well within an order of magnitude among both CM2 and CR2 meteorites for parent body temperatures $<$ 200$^{\circ}$C. These temperatures agree with 3D models of young planetesimal interiors. We find theoretical abundances of approximately 7x10$^5$ parts-per-billion (ppb), which is in agreement with the average observed abundance in CR2 meteorites of 4$\pm$7x10$^5$, but an order of magnitude higher than the average observed abundance in CM2 meteorites of 2$\pm$2x10$^4$. We find that the production of hydroxy acids could be favoured over the production of amino acids within certain meteorite parent bodies (e.g. CI1, CM2) but not others (e.g. CR2). This could be due to the relatively lower NH$_3$ abundances within CI1 and CM2 meteorite parent bodies, which leads to less amino acid synthesis. We also find that the water content in planetesimals is likely to be the main cause of variance between carbonaceous chondrites of the same subclass. We propose that amino acid abundances are primarily dependent on the ammonia and water content of planetesimals that are formed in chemically distinct regions within their natal protostellar disks.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".