MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deposition of Interior Layer Deposits within East and West Candor as well as Ophir chasms, Valles Marineris, Mars

2020· article· en· W3093773935 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Fueten, Amanda Burden, Ariel Van Patter, Josh Labrie, J. Flahaut, Robert Stesky, Ernst Hauber

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutions3M (Canada)Brock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyMars Exploration ProgramGeochemistryGeomorphologyPaleontologyAstrobiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Martian Valles Marineris, located on the eastern flank of the Tharsis region, is a 4000 km long linked system of troughs. The formation of the up-to-11 km deep chasmata of Valles Marineris is thought to have taken place during a two-stage process in which ancestral basins collapsed and were later linked by tectonism. Located within most chasmata are enigmatic layered deposits, referred to as interior layered deposits (ILDs), whose origin and mechanism of formation are uncertain. It has been estimated that ILDs cover 17% of the total area, representing 60% by volume of all deposits within Valles Marineris with several deposits nearly reaching the height of the surrounding plateau. Here we present the results of a detailed study of the ILD mounds located within three of the presumed ancestral basins in the center of Valles Marineris. In this study HiRISE and CTX images were used to measure layer attitudes of ILDs within East and West Candor and Ophir chasmata. Because only CTX images cover the entire chasms, the ILDs were grouped into distinct varities of bedding based on their appearance in CTX imagery. In both East and West Candor and Ophir, the stratigraphically lowest unit is a massive unit which displays no layering in any available imagery. Layered units with dips between 10° and 20° are deposited on top of this massive unit. The lowest layered units in all three chasms appear to show multiple prominent benches, indicative of significant competency contrasts. These units can be shown in multiple places to be unconformably overlain by thinner layered units. It is not possible to correlate or determine the number of thinner layered units because the unconformable contacts cannot be correlated. The general similarities of types of units and unit relationships between the ILDs in these three chasms suggests that they share a similar depositional history. We believe that the ILD morphology is most compatible with an environmental setting in which the ancestral basins were lakes which may have been periodically frozen. We suggest that the unconformities are the result of multiple erosional events indicating that ILD deposition was not continuous. A general trend of massive units overlain by thinner layered units may reflect a change in the environment and sediment supply. Associated with this change is a general observation that polyhydrated sulfate is most commonly found on top of the monohydrated material. Work to correlate more closely units within these chasms, including their mineralogy, is currently ongoing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207