Dingo Gap: Curiosity Went Up a Small Transverse Aeolian Ridge and Came Down a Megaripple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rover data can provide important constraints on the possible origin of wind‐related martian features that have been termed “Transverse Aeolian Ridges” (TARs). The large aeolian bedform traversed by Curiosity at Dingo Gap has a planform and albedo similar to members of nearby TAR fields, so that the crossing at Dingo Gap revealed the surface characteristics of a small TAR. Mars Hand Lens Imager images documented 1–2 mm diameter, well‐rounded particles on the Dingo Gap bedform, along with numerous images obtained from the Mastcam, Hazcam, and Navcam science and engineering cameras on the rover. These images confirm that this feature (and, by extension, all small TARs) can be considered a megaripple whose surface is coated by rounded particles that are too large to be set into motion through saltation, but they may be induced to roll (creep) along the surface by the impact of saltating sand grains (a characteristic of megaripples on Earth). The images also confirm that a bimodal wind was present here, a condition that could have contributed to the symmetrical profile of the bedform. The bearing strength at Dingo Gap was better than that of the Purgatory megaripple that trapped Opportunity for several weeks, so that all megaripples should not be automatically presumed to represent a trafficability hazard for a rover.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".