MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408423271 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-3289

Electromagnetic Sounding on Mars with InSight

2025· preprint· en· W4408423271 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Mittelholz, Alexander Grayver, Catherine L. Johnson, Federico Munch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramDepth soundingAstrobiologyRemote sensingGeologyEnvironmental scienceEarth scienceGeophysicsPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The NASA InSight mission operated on Mars from November 2018 to May 2022, primarily aimed at investigating the planet’s interior structure using seismology, geodesy, and heat flow measurements. Among its instruments was the InSight Fluxgate magnetometer, IFG, part of an auxiliary sensor suite, which provided environmental monitoring data. The IFG captured the first surface measurements of Mars’ crustal magnetic field, as well as time-varying magnetic fields. These data enable electromagnetic (EM) sounding, a technique that uses interactions between time-varying magnetic fields and the subsurface to infer electrical conductivity. Electrical conductivity is in turn linked to subsurface mineralogy, temperature, and volatile content, offering complementary insights to other geophysical methods.Previous attempts to use InSight IFG data for EM sounding were unsuccessful due to contamination from spacecraft-generated signals and limited data coverage. Here, we report the first successful EM sounding results from InSight data. By focusing on time periods of 100–1000 seconds, where coherence between horizontal and vertical magnetic field components is high, we compute transfer functions. Further, we derive the corresponding C-response under the assumption of an inducing field geometry and invert those for electrical subsurface elctrical conductivity.Because the largest scale inducing field detectable at the equator (n=m=1) provides a maximum penetration depth and a lower limit of crustal conductivity, we evaluate the effect of a range of inducing field geometries. Irrespective of inducing field geometry, our results reveal conductivity profiles, characterized by a high-conductivity crust (>~10⁻² S/m) underlain by more resistive material. This contrasts with expectations of a cold, dry Martian crust and suggests elevated volatile content, high iron concentrations, and / or increased temperatures.Our findings demonstrate the utility of EM sounding on Mars and underscore the scientific potential of magnetometer data in planetary exploration. They also highlight the need for further investigation of Martian electrical conductivity at longer periods and therfore at larger depths, which may reveal new insights into the planet’s thermal evolution and volatile inventory.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207