MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410790474 · doi:10.3847/psj/adce75

Laser-induced Breakdown Spectroscopy of Ice-regolith Mixtures: Implications for Measurements on Planetary Surfaces

2025· article· en· W4410790474 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Frédéric Diotte, M. Lemelin, François R. Doucet, Lütfü Ç. Özcan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Planetary Science Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsRegolithLaser-induced breakdown spectroscopyAstrobiologySpectroscopyMaterials sciencePlanetary sciencePlanetary surfaceLaserOpticsAstronomyPhysicsMars Exploration Program

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) is an analytical technique enabling in situ chemical analysis of planetary surfaces. Its use on the Mars Science Laboratory and Mars 2020 missions has demonstrated the potential for quantifying water in hydrated minerals, prompting investigations into its application for detecting and quantifying water ice in lunar regolith. Although promising results have been reported under vacuum conditions, previous measurements do not fully represent the range of physical forms that ice-regolith mixtures may take on the Moon. In this study, we use a scanning LIBS micro-analyzer to assess the main sources of signal variance and the response of the H α emission line to 0–40 wt% water ice in two types of ice-regolith mixtures. We find that the primary factor influencing hydrogen emission is enhanced laser coupling with larger grains in wet or ice-cemented regolith due to increased cohesion. Emission from “cemented” ice-regolith mixtures exhibits increasing H α intensity up to ∼15 wt%, followed by a decline attributed to water saturation. In contrast, emission from “discrete” ice-regolith mixtures shows no consistent H α response in the 0–10 wt% range. Regression models trained on physically diverse mixtures reduce the rms error of predicted H 2 O content by 5.6% across the 0–40 wt% range. These results highlight the need for calibration using geologic materials that reflect grain size, porosity, and type of ice-regolith mixture. They also demonstrate the value of scanning LIBS technologies for identifying sources of signal variability in planetary applications.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Planetary Science JournalSame topicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasmaFrench-language works237,207