Complex crater formation: Insights from combining observations of shock pressure distribution with numerical models at the West Clearwater Lake impact structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Large impact structures have complex morphologies, with zones of structural uplift that can be expressed topographically as central peaks and/or peak rings internal to the crater rim. The formation of these structures requires transient strength reduction in the target material and one of the proposed mechanisms to explain this behavior is acoustic fluidization. Here, samples of shock‐metamorphosed quartz‐bearing lithologies at the West Clearwater Lake impact structure, Canada, are used to estimate the maximum recorded shock pressures in three dimensions across the crater. These measurements demonstrate that the currently observed distribution of shock metamorphism is strongly controlled by the formation of the structural uplift. The distribution of peak shock pressures, together with apparent crater morphology and geological observations, is compared with numerical impact simulations to constrain parameters used in the block‐model implementation of acoustic fluidization. The numerical simulations produce craters that are consistent with morphological and geological observations. The results show that the regeneration of acoustic energy must be an important feature of acoustic fluidization in crater collapse, and should be included in future implementations. Based on the comparison between observational data and impact simulations, we conclude that the West Clearwater Lake structure had an original rim (final crater) diameter of 35–40 km and has since experienced up to ~2 km of differential erosion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".