MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993824162 · doi:10.1029/2019gl084792

Nitrogen Exsolution and Bubble Formation in Titan's Lakes

2019· article· en· W2993824162 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Farnsworth, V. F. Chevrier, Jordan K. Steckloff, D. Laxton, S. Singh, Alejandro Soto, J. M. Soderblom

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsTitan (rocket family)MethaneNitrogenBubbleSupersaturationMetastabilityChemical physicsAtmosphere of TitanAstrobiologyMaterials scienceChemistryPhysicsMechanicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Titan's surface liquids are composed primarily of methane, ethane, and dissolved atmospheric nitrogen. The nitrogen content depends on the alkane composition and temperature, and exsolves as bubbles when these parameters are sufficiently perturbed. Herein, we present an experimental study of nitrogen bubbles in methane–ethane liquids, and propose that both methane and ethane are required for bubbles to form under Titan conditions. Bubbles occur when methane composes 40–95 mol% of the alkanes within the liquid. We identify two mechanisms that produce bubbles: ethane mediated titration and temperature‐induced stratification. Both of these mechanisms produce a metastable nitrogen supersaturation within the liquid; equilibration triggers rapid nitrogen exsolution in the form of bubbles. Such equilibration could cause bubble events in Titan's lakes, possibly explaining the transient “Magic Island” features seen by Cassini RADAR (bubbles within the liquid column), and the presence of deltas in Ontario Lacus.

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)0.000
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 score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207