MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Thermal history and emplacement mechanisms of Theo’s Flow lava: a proxy for Martian lava flows

2020· article· en· W3126400832 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mara Murri, Chiara M. Domeneghetti, A. M. Fioretti, Fabrizio Nestola, Francesco Vetere, Diego Perugini, Alessandro Pisello, Manuele Faccenda, Matteo Alvaro

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLavaArcheanGeologyChemistryGeochemistryVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Terrestrial analogues are often investigated to get insights into the geological processes occurring on other planetary bodies. The pyroxenitic layer of the 120m-thick magmatic pile Theo’s Flow (Archean Abitibi greenstone belt Ontario, Canada), due to its petrological similarities, has always been regarded as the terrestrial analogue for Martian nakhlites (e.g. Lentz et al. 2011). However, its origin and cooling history and, as a consequence those of nakhlites, have always been a matter of vigorous debate. Did this lava flow originate from a single magmatic event similar to those supposed to occur on Mars or do the different units derive from multiple eruptions? To answer this question, we calculated the closure temperature and the cooling history for six augite crystals of Theo’s Flow lava sampled at four different stratigraphic depths. These results were then coupled with (i) the low viscosity data by Vetere et al. (2019) on the same composition and (ii) the results from the finite difference method in order to test the possible emplacement mechanisms for Theo’s Flow. The combination of geothermometric constraints on augite single crystals and numerical simulations in the framework of a multi-methodological approach, allowed us to demonstrate that Theo’s Flow has been formed by multiple magma emplacements that occurred at different times (Murri et al. 2019). Moreover, this discovery also supports the idea that the enormous lava flows with similar compositions observed on Mars could be the result of a process where low viscosity lavas are emplaced during multiple eruptions. This has profound implications for understanding the multiscale mechanisms of lava flow emplacement on Earth and other Terrestrial bodies. M.M. and M.A. have been funded by the IMPACt project (R164WEJAHH) and by the ERC-StG TRUE DEPTHS under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (n. 714936) to M. Alvaro. M.C.D. has been funded by the IMPACt project (R164WEJAHH) to M. Alvaro. D.P. has been funded by the ERC Consolidator Grant ERC-2013-COG (n. 612776) for the CHRONOS project to D. Perugini. The Alexander von Humboldt foundation senior research grant to F.V. is acknowledged. M.A. is also supported by the Ministero dell’Istruzione dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR)Progetti di Ricerca di Interesse Nazionale (PRIN)Bando PRIN 2017 - Prot. 2017ZE49E7_005. Lentz, R.C.F., McCoy, T.J., Collins, L.E., Corrigan, C.M., Benedix, G.K., Taylor, G.J. and Harvey, R.P., 2011. Theo's Flow, Ontario, Canada: A terrestrial analog for the Martian nakhlite meteorites. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 483, pp.263-277. Murri, M., Domeneghetti, M.C., Fioretti, A.M., Nestola, F., Vetere, F., Perugini, D., Pisello, A., Faccenda, M. and Alvaro, M., 2019. Cooling history and emplacement of a pyroxenitic lava as proxy for understanding Martian lava flows. Scientific reports, 9(1), pp.1-7. Vetere, F., Murri, M., Alvaro, M., Domeneghetti, M.C., Rossi, S., Pisello, A., Perugini, D. and Holtz, F., 2019. Viscosity of Pyroxenite Melt and its Evolution during Cooling. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 124(5), pp.1451-1469.

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)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 Exploration→French-language works237,207→