MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037544148 · doi:10.1002/xrs.3172

Powdered rock versus solid rock comparisons in particle‐induced X‐ray emission measurements for planetary geochemical exploration

2020· article· en· W3037544148 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin L. Flannigan, J. G. Spray, L. M. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueX-Ray Spectrometry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsMartianPelletsMineralogyGeologyIgneous rockMars Exploration ProgramGrain sizeGeochemistryAstrobiologyGeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grain size is an important consideration in the determination of the bulk chemistry of Martian rocks and unconsolidated materials in situ by the alpha particle X‐ray spectrometer (APXS), deployed on the NASA‐led Mars Science Laboratory mission. We used 2.5 MeV protons to emulate the particle‐induced X‐ray emission (PIXE) branch (5 MeV alphas) of the APXS. Seven polished rock slabs (igneous and sedimentary), ranging from fine‐ to coarse‐grained, were analyzed by PIXE in their original form, then milled to powders and pressed into pellets for further analysis. The summed area (160 mm 2 ) over 10 interrogated regions on each slab is comparable to the area interrogated on the APXS; analysis of two pellets per rock, each using a 16 mm 2 region, was found to be appropriate. The mean pellet/slab concentration ratio for Na, Mg, Al, Si, K, Ca, and Fe was close to 1.0 for fine‐grained samples, but changed by ±10% for the coarser cases. The variability among PIXE concentration values across the 10 rock regions increased monotonically with coarseness in the rock slabs. Comparison of overall PIXE concentrations with values measured by borate‐fusion WDXRF provides further quantitative support to the direct comparison of pellet and slab PIXE concentrations. This work affirms the use of the APXS on fine‐grained Martian materials but recommends larger interrogation areas (including rastering) when analyzing coarser‐grained materials. It also demonstrates that the presence of relatively large mineral grains (phenocrysts) or rock/mineral fragments within fine‐grained materials can contribute to greater error for specific elements associated with those phenocrysts/fragments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueX-Ray SpectrometrySame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207