New slope-normalized global gully density and orientation maps for Mars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We reanalyse the global distribution of gullies in order to provide a set of observational constraints that models of gully formation must explain. We validate our results derived from the global data with four detailed case studies. We show that the availability of steep slopes is an essential factor to consider when assessing the spatial distribution and abundance of gullies. When the availability of steep slopes is taken into account, it reveals, with a few exceptions, that gullies are found almost uniformly across the whole 30°–90° latitude band. Our analysis also reveals that massive ice deposits are anti-correlated with gullies, and that the undulations in the equatorwards limits of the gully distribution could be explained by longitudinal variations in maximum surface temperatures (controlled by variations in surface properties, including thermal inertia and albedo). We find a sharp transition in both hemispheres between pole-facing gullies, which extend from 30° to 40°, to a more mixed, but dominantly equator-facing orientation of gullies polewards of 40°. We have no definitive explanation for this transition but, based on previous studies, we suggest it could be linked to the availability of near-surface ice deposits.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".