MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412120197 · doi:10.5194/epsc-dps2025-943

Simulating optical depth studies on a Martian helicopter via a drone-based field study in the Alvord Desert, Oregon

2025· preprint· en· W4412120197 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Axelrod, Brian Jackson, John E. Moores

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesert (philosophy)DroneMartianField (mathematics)Remote sensingGeographyEnvironmental scienceMars Exploration ProgramGeologyAstrobiologyPhysicsBiologyMathematicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dust studies are of interest to the Martian science community as they reveal important information on the spatial and temporal variability of dust loading in the atmosphere. This dust concentration information, in turn, illuminates atmospheric circulation and boundary layer height. To monitor dust in the atmosphere on Mars, NASA’s Martian Science Laboratory rover’s Mastcam and Navigation Camera (NavCam) have probed the atmosphere in Gale Crater since its landing in 2012. To determine dust loading in the Martian atmosphere, line-of-sight (LOS) optical depth has been used in previous studies using Mastcam (e.g. Smith et al. (2019)). These studies calculate optical depth per km, a quantity known as extinction, that is directly proportional to the number of dust particles per unit volume. However, due to the MSL rover’s inability to move significantly in vertical space before dust conditions change, elevation-dependent studies are limited to elevation angle studies, resulting in the inability to constrain the spatial position of dust features (such as dust devils) and the inability to get optical depth along a constant-elevation line of sight. The goal of this work is to develop and demonstrate a framework in which the spatial variation in extinction can be observed and calculated via a camera mounted on a drone flight, which can be applied to a future drone-based Mars mission. To test this, footage from a drone-mounted camera flown in the Alvord Desert, Oregon, United States in 2024 was used to determine optical depth as a function of elevation in RGB color channels. The drone flew above a desert salt pan over the course of several minutes. Two frames from one of the drone videos, one near-ground and one elevated, is given in Figure 1. To calculate the line-of-sight optical depth in the region of interest, the mountainous region far away from the camera, a similar method to what is used in Smith et al. (2019), will be used, but will be further improved via geometric transformations to obtain a horizontal-layered altitude profile of line-of-sight optical depth. These improvements, and how they can be used in a Mars-like setting to construct a full vertical profile of line-of-sight optical depth, will be discussed in this conference presentation. ReferencesMoores et al. 2015. Icarus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2014.09.020Smith et al. 2019. Geophys. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083788

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 Exploration→French-language works237,207→