MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775139582 · doi:10.1029/2017je005448

Topographic Expressions of Large Thrust Faults on Mars

2018· article· en· W2775139582 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Klimczak, Corbin L. Kling, P. K. Byrne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Planets · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGeologyFault scarpThrust faultFault (geology)Mars Exploration ProgramLandformTectonicsThrustDisplacement (psychology)SeismologyGeodesyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On planets with little erosion, thrust faults produce broad, asymmetric, positive‐relief, linear to arcuate ridges—often referred to as lobate scarps—that remain largely unaltered, such that their topographic expressions are a measure of the structural uplift caused by the displacement and associated country rock deformation of the faults. Here we map and systematically assess the structural relief of 24 thrust faults across Mars to infer their growth behavior. Our mapping indicates that the majority of individual thrust faults have simple, linear map traces with lengths of up to ~450 km but that some thrust faults form systems of up to 1,400 km in length. For the most topographically pronounced landforms, the structural relief developed above the fault is as great as ~3,400 m. We then relate topographic measurements to the displacement on the underlying fault planes to study the displacement variations along the fault length. We find a variety of displacement distribution shapes of the fault systems, which we attribute to differences in fault growth that include unrestricted and restricted growth, linkage, and/or fault interaction. Finally, we relate the maximum displacements ( D max ) determined for each of the faults to their respective fault length ( L ) to establish a maximum displacement‐to‐length relationship. The observed scaling characteristics and order‐of‐magnitude scatter of our D max / L data are not uncommon for fault populations on Earth and tie in well with the map patterns, tectonic geomorphology, and systematic along‐strike displacement distributions to have grown in a basement‐block faulting style found in intraplate tectonic settings on Earth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research PlanetsSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207