MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126796793

Polar Wander of Mars: Evidence from Giant Impact Basins

2009· article· en· W3126796793 on OpenAlexaff
J. Arkani‐Hamed

Bibliographic record

VenueAGU Spring Meeting Abstracts · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTharsisGeologyMars Exploration ProgramPolar wanderHesperianVolcanoClockwiseGeophysicsEarth scienceAstrobiologyPaleomagnetismPaleontologyMartianRotation (mathematics)GeometryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the polar wander of Mars in the last ∼4.2 Ga. We identify two sets of basins from the 20 giant impact basins reported by Frey [Frey, H., 2008. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L13203] which trace great circles on Mars, and propose that the great circles were the prevailing equators of Mars at the impact times. Monte Carlo tests are conducted to demonstrate that the two sets of basins are most likely not created by random impacts. Also, fitting 63,771 planes to randomly selected sets of 5, 6, or 7 basins indicated that the identified two sets are unique. We propose three different positions for the rotation pole of Mars, besides the present one. Accordingly, Tharsis bulge was initially formed at ∼50 N and moved toward the equator while rotating counterclockwise due to the influence of the two newly forming volcanic constructs, Alba Patera and Elysium Rise. The formation of the giant impact basins, subsequent mass concentrations (mascons) in Argyre, Isidis, and Utopia basins, and surface masses of volcanic mountains such as Ascraeus, Pavonis, Arsia and Olympus, caused further polar wander which rotated Tharsis bulge clockwise to arrive at its present location. The extensive polar motion of Mars during 4.2–3.9 Ga implies a weak lithosphere on a global scale, deduced from a total of 72,000 polar wander models driven by Tharsis bulge, Alba Patera and Elysium Rise as the major mass perturbations. Different compensation states, 0–100%, are examined for each of the surface loads, and nine different thicknesses are considered for an elastic lithosphere. The lithosphere must have been very weak, with an elastic thickness of less than 5 km, if the polar wander was driven by these mass perturbations.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAGU Spring Meeting AbstractsSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207