MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391605297 · doi:10.1029/2023je008007

Europa's Double Ridges Produced by Ice Wedging

2024· article· en· W4391605297 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Diane Cashion, Brandon Johnson, Harry Gibson, E. P. Turtle, Michael M. Sori, H. J. Melosh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Planets · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
FundersApplied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGeologyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Double ridges are sprawling features observed globally across the icy surface of Europa. They consist of two topographic highs flanking a trough. The topographic relief of the ridges is approximately 100 m, and the ridges extend up to hundreds of kilometers in length. The interior structure and dynamics of Europa's ice shell are currently poorly constrained. Therefore, accurate models for the formation of these prominent surface features can be useful for determining how the ice shell operates. We hypothesize that double ridges form as a result of incremental ice wedging. We use both analytical and numerical finite element models to quantify the deformation that occurs as an ice wedge grows incrementally within the ice shell. We show that incremental growth of the ice wedge results in surface deformation that matches the size and shape of typical Europan double ridges, including their topographic relief and surrounding troughs. We find that as the depth of the ice wedge increases, double ridges become broader and shorter. We explore the possibility of local and non‐local sources for the liquid water that freezes to produce the wedge and ultimately argue in favor of local sources of liquid water within the ice shell.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research PlanetsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207