Explanation for the increase in high altitude water on Mars observed by NOMAD during the 2018 global dust storm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the GEM-Mars three-dimensional general circulation model (GCM), we examine the mechanism responsible for the enhancement of water vapour in the upper atmosphere as measured by the Nadir and Occultation for MArs Discovery (NOMAD) instrument onboard ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO) during the 2018 global dust storm on Mars. Experiments with different prescribed vertical profiles of dust show that when more dust is present higher in the atmosphere, the temperature increases and the amount of water ascending over the tropics is not limited by saturation until reaching heights of 70-100 km. The warmer temperatures allow more water to ascend to the mesosphere. The simulation of enhanced high-altitude water abundances is very sensitive to the vertical distribution of the dust prescribed in the model. The GEM-Mars model includes gas-phase photochemistry, and these simulations show how the increased water vapour over the 40-100 km altitude range results in the production of high-altitude atomic hydrogen which can be linked to atmospheric escape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".