MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412095072 · doi:10.1111/maps.70002

A feasibility assessment of micromill sampling for Rb‐Sr and Sm‐Nd geochronology of shergottites

2025· article· en· W4412095072 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex I. Sheen, C. D. K. Herd, K. T. Tait

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteoritics and Planetary Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsGeochronologyGeologyGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate dating of Martian meteorites is crucial for understanding key events in the planet's evolution. However, not all Martian meteorites are amenable to dating techniques currently in use for these rocks. The priority of sample preservation precludes mineral separation methods for low‐volume specimens, whereas the less destructive in situ SIMS U‐Pb method depends on the availability of U‐bearing accessory minerals. Micromilling allows for spatially guided sampling of target phases down to the sub‐mm scale, therefore enabling chromatography‐based analysis while preserving the overall specimen. This study presents an evaluation of micromill sampling for extracting individual mineral fractions in situ from shergottites, the most common group of Martian meteorites, for Rb‐Sr and Sm‐Nd geochronology. Based on trace element content in major minerals in shergottites (pyroxene, plagioclase, olivine, and merrillite) and assuming that a minimum load size of 0.25 ng Sr and 1 ng Nd is required to achieve baseline isotopic precision (2 σ of ~240 ppm on 87 Sr/ 86 Sr and ~100 ppm on 143 Nd/ 144 Nd), the minimum required sample volume ranges in the orders of 10 5 –10 7 μm 3 for one Sr isotopic analysis and 10 5 –10 9 μm 3 for one Nd isotopic analysis. Considering the need for sample purity, significant limitations exist in the maximum sampling resolution of the micromill instrument (~40 μm for the conical carbide drill bit chosen for this study) with respect to shergottite petrography. Insufficient grain size, irregular morphology, and the presence of small inclusions may reduce the area that can be drilled per grain. Shock‐induced fractures, which sometimes act as pathways for terrestrial alteration, are pervasive in shergottites and create additional challenges for effective high‐purity sampling of the target phase. In addition, variation in trace element content in the target phases may result in the realistically required drilling volumes being orders of magnitude greater than the minimum estimates. Lastly, estimated drilling time per fraction may reach over 5 h for pyroxene (Sr, Nd), plagioclase (Nd), and olivine (Sr, Nd), increasing the susceptibility to a larger procedural blank as well as requiring constant, labor‐intensive monitoring for long durations. Based on these technical and physical constraints, we do not consider micromill sampling to be currently compatible with Sr isotopic analysis of olivine and Nd isotopic analysis of pyroxene, plagioclase, and olivine in shergottites. The feasibility of geochronology applications may be improved with future advances in analytical development, such as increasing the micromill sampling resolution and reducing the load size required for isotopic analysis.

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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeteoritics and Planetary ScienceSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207