Automated Grouping of Opportunity Rover Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer Compositional Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer (APXS) conducts high-precision in situ measurements of rocks and soils on both active NASA Mars rovers. Since 2004 the rover Opportunity has acquired around 440 unique APXS measurements, including a wide variety of compositions, during its 42+ kilometers traverse across several geological formations. Here we discuss an analytical comparison algorithm providing a means to cluster samples due to compositional similarity and the resulting automated classification scheme. Due to the inherent variance of elements in the APXS data set, each element has an associated weight that is inversely proportional to the variance. Thus, the more consistent the abundance of an element in the data set, the more it contributes to the classification. All 16 elements standard to the APXS data set are considered. Careful attention is also given to the errors associated with the composition measured by the APXS - larger uncertainties reduce the weighting of the element accordingly. The comparison of two targets, i and j, generates a similarity score, S(sub ij). This score is immediately comparable to an average ratio across all elements if one assumes standard weighted uncertainty. The algorithm facilitates the classification of APXS targets by chemistry alone - independent of target appearance and geological context which can be added later as a consistency check. For the N targets considered, a N by N hollow matrix, S, is generated where S = S(sup T). The average relation score, S(sub av), for target N(sub i) is simply the average of column i of S. A large S(sub av) is indicative of a unique sample. In such an instance any targets with a low comparison score can be classified alike. The threshold between classes requires careful consideration. Applying the algorithm to recent Marathon Valley targets indicates similarities with Burns formation and average-Mars-like rocks encountered earlier at Endeavour Crater as well as a new class of felsic rocks.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".