Gypsum on Mars: A Detailed View at Gale Crater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gypsum is a common mineral at Gale crater on Mars, currently being explored by the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) rover, Curiosity. In this paper, we summarize the associations of gypsum with other sulfate minerals (bassanite, anhydrite, jarosite, starkeyite, and kieserite) from the lowest levels of the crater’s northern moat zone (Aeolis Palus) up through ~0.8 km of the stratigraphic section in the lower slopes of the sedimentary mound developed around the central peak, Aeolis Mons (informally, Mount Sharp). The analysis is based on results from the CheMin X-ray diffraction instrument on Curiosity, supplemented with information from the rover’s versatile instrument suite. Gypsum does not occur with the same frequency as less hydrous Ca-sulfates, likely, in most cases, because of its dehydration to bassanite and possibly to anhydrite. All three of these Ca-sulfate phases often occur together and, along with other sulfates, in mixed assemblages that are evidence of limited equilibration on a cold, dry planet. In almost all samples, at least one of the Ca-sulfate minerals is present, except for a very limited interval where jarosite is the major sulfate mineral, with the implication of more acidic groundwater at a much later time in Gale crater’s history. Although observations from orbit reveal a sulfate-rich surface, currently active dark basaltic dunes at Gale crater have only small amounts of a single sulfate mineral, anhydrite. Gale crater has provided the most complete mineralogical analysis of a site on Mars so far, but the data in hand show that Gale crater mineralogy is not a blueprint with planet-wide application. The concurrent study of Jezero crater by the Mars 2020 mission and comparisons to what is believed to be the most extensive deposit of gypsum on Mars, in the dune fields at the north polar ice cap, show significant diversity. Unraveling the stories of gypsum and other sulfates on Mars is just beginning.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".