MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W238292944

Covariant C and O Isotope Trends in Arctic Carbonate Crusts and ALH 84001: Potential Biomarker or Indicator of Cryogenic Formation Environment?

2009· article· en· W238292944 on OpenAlexaff
R. A. Socki, P. B. Niles, Weston Blake, Richard Léveillé

Bibliographic record

Venue40th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space AgencyGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoriteCarbonateMartianChemistryMars Exploration ProgramDeltaCarbonate mineralsGeologyMineralogyIsotopes of oxygenGeochemistryAstrobiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work seeks to use the chemical, isotopic, and mineralogical characteristics of secondary carbonate minerals produced during brief aqueous events to identify the conditions of the aqueous environment in which they formed. Liquid water near the surface of Mars is subject to either rapid freezing and/or evaporation. These processes are also active on Earth, and produce secondary minerals that have complex chemical, mineralogical, and isotopic textures and compositions that can include covariant relationships between Delta C-13 (sub VPDB) and delta O-18 (sub VSMOW). The extremely well studied four billion year old carbonates preserved in martian meteorite ALH 84001 also show covariant delta C-13 and delta O-18 compositions, but these variations are manifested on a micro-scale in a single thin section while the variation observed so far in terrestrial carbonates is seen between different hand samples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue40th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science ConferenceSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207