South Pole Aitken Basin magnetic anomalies: Evidence for the true polar wander of Moon and a lunar dynamo reversal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The analysis of the Lunar Prospector magnetic data over South Pole Aitken basin reveals two categories of magnetic anomalies with distinctly different polarities. Modeling the anomalies in terms of vertical prism source bodies shows two separate true polar wander paths of the Moon. One is driven by the giant surface mass deficiency resulted from the formation of the South Pole Aitken basin and the other by the giant surface mass concentrations (mascons) formed inside the large impact basins, such as Serenitatis and Imbrium, and a vast volcanic deposit on Procellarum Terrane. A total of ~100° true polar wander path suggests that the source bodies are formed and magnetized during a long period. Moreover, the distinctly different polarities of the two categories of the anomalies support the idea that the core dynamo underwent a reversal or shutdown and started up with a different polarity, caused by the latter impacts. The impact‐induced shock pressures of 10–20 GPa traveling inside the lunar core, the appreciable angular momentum transfer to the lunar mantle by the impacting bodies, and the impact‐induced stratification of the core probably reversed the polarity of the core dynamo. We also model the north Crisium magnetic anomaly, extracted from the Lunar Prospector magnetic data. The paleomagnetic pole position obtained for the source body reveals that the north Crisium anomaly belongs to the first category of the anomalies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".