MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082519271 · doi:10.1029/2020je006505

The Origin of Observed Magnetic Variability for a Sol on Mars From InSight

2020· article· en· W3082519271 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Mittelholz, C. L. Johnson, Shea N. Thorne, S. P. Joy, Elizabeth Ann Barrett, Matthew Fillingim, F. Forget, B. Langlais, C. T. Russell, Aymeric Spiga, S. E. Smrekar, W. B. Banerdt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Planets · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsDynamoMars Exploration ProgramAmplitudeMagnetometerMagnetic fieldIonosphereSolar windAtmospheric sciencesMercury's magnetic fieldPhysicsLocal timeInterplanetary magnetic fieldGeophysicsAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Day‐night variations in the magnetic field at Mars have been previously observed at satellite altitudes. The InSight Fluxgate Magnetometer (IFG) has provided the first evidence for diurnal magnetic field variations at the martian surface. IFG data show diurnal variations with typical peak amplitudes of 20–40nT in the early morning to midmorning; the amplitude of the magnetic field varies over the first 389 sols of the mission and peaks between sols 50 and 100. Temperature variations, solar array currents, and lander activities all generate magnetic fields. Particularly, the first two of these also produce signals with clear diurnal variations. We first assess the IFG data calibration and conclude that temperature and solar array currents have only minimal effects on the variability we observe in the final calibrated magnetic field data. We use satellite magnetic field data and a Mars global circulation model to make predictions for the temporal evolution of wind‐driven fields in the ionosphere. Such fields vary due to seasonal changes in the ionization profile and the winds, and in the altitude range of the dynamo region, that is, the region in which electric currents can be produced. We find that the amplitude and seasonal variability of the surface magnetic fields are generally consistent with those predicted from wind‐driven currents. Moreover, a regional dust storm in the vicinity of the InSight landing site, which started around sol 45, might be responsible for the higher magnetic field amplitudes observed in the IFG data in the early part of the mission.

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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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