MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396514847 · doi:10.1111/maps.14162

Impact origin of lunar zircon melt inclusions in Apollo impact melt breccia 14311

2024· article· en· W4396514847 on OpenAlexaff
C. A. Crow, C. Tong, Timmons M. Erickson, D. E. Moser, A. S. Bell, Nigel M. Kelly, T. C. Prissel, B. C. Hyde

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteoritics and Planetary Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversity of Colorado BoulderNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGeologyBrecciaMelt inclusionsIgneous rockImpact craterShock metamorphismImpact structureGeochemistryZirconInclusion (mineral)MeteoriteAstrobiologyMineralogyMantle (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Investigations of trapped melt inclusions in minerals can yield insights into the compositions and conditions of parent magmas. These insights are particularly important for detrital grains like many of the lunar zircons found in samples returned by the Apollo missions. However, unlike their terrestrial counterparts, lunar zircons have potentially been exposed to billions of years of impact bombardment. Samples from terrestrial impact structures and impact shock experiments have revealed that deformation during an impact event produces melt and glass blebs that can mimic igneous melt inclusions in both morphology and composition. We have undertaken a geochemical and textural investigation of zircons from Apollo impact melt breccia 14311 to assess their formation mechanisms. The association of trapped melts with shock microtwins and monomineralic melt compositions suggests some inclusions formed as a result of the high pressures and temperatures of impact shock. All other inclusions in this study are associated with curviplanar features, planar features, crystal plastic deformation, or embayments (large regions in contact with adjacent melts or minerals) suggesting that they are not igneous melt inclusions. While these textures can be produced in tectonic environments, impacts are a likely formation mechanism since impacts are the main driver of tectonics on the Moon. The results of this study demonstrate that a combination of textural and compositional analyses can be employed distinguish between igneous melt inclusions and melt blebs in zircons from impact environments.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeteoritics and Planetary ScienceSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207