Bibliographic record
Abstract
[1] This paper examines the magnetization that can be acquired by the lower crust of Mars in the absence of a core field but in the presence of the magnetic field of the upper crust that is magnetized by the core field. A uniformly magnetized vertical prism of a square horizontal cross section is considered to be a magnetic source in the upper crust for simplicity. Three thicknesses of 40, 60, and 80 km and six horizontal dimensions of 180, 300, 600, 900, 1200, and 1500 km are considered for the prism. To estimate the upper limit for the contribution of the lower crust to the observed magnetic anomalies, a potentially magnetic layer of 100 km thickness is adopted. Coarse-grain hematite is uniformly distributed in the lower crust with 4, 10, 20, or 30% concentration of hematite. The first is equivalent to the oceanic extrusive basalt as far as its thermo-remanent magnetization (TRM) is concerned. It is shown that the magnetization of the lower crust has minor effects on the strong magnetic anomalies of Mars over the southern hemisphere. However, if the lower crust has 20 to 30% coarse-grain hematite, which is highly unlikely, it may have appreciable contributions to small magnetic anomalies of Mars with horizontal dimensions smaller than 200 km.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".