Olivine fabric and microstructure in Northwest Africa (<scp>NWA</scp>) 7059 and Nova 018: Insights into ureilite deformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Olivine is a major constituent in ureilites and commonly defines macroscopic fabric via shape‐preferred orientation of elongate grains. In this study, we examined olivine fabric (crystallographic preferred orientation, or CPO) and microstructures in the unbrecciated olivine‐pigeonite ureilites Northwest Africa (NWA) 7059 and Nova 018 using electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) analysis. Point‐per‐grain orientation data of NWA 7059 indicate a <010> lineation subparallel to grain elongation. Misorientation data of two grains in NWA 7059 indicate dominant activity of (010) [100], (001) [100], (100) [001], and { hk 0} [001] slip systems. Nova 018 displays an axial‐[010] fabric, with misorientations indicating (010) [001], { hk 0} [001] slips, and formation of (010) twist boundaries. Axial‐[010] fabric in Nova 018 is consistent with compaction of residual olivine during melt extraction. The <010> lineation in NWA 7059 is unlike typical ureilite fabric and requires a [010] Burgers vector, uncommon in terrestrial samples. Rotational axis analysis of 2°–10° misorientations in olivine shows that the relative proportion of [001] slips and [100] slips in both ureilites are similar to warm‐shocked ordinary chondrites, which were deformed at subsolidus temperatures. However, subsolidus deformation temperatures for both studied ureilites are inconsistent with a “hot disruption” model for the ureilite parent body (UPB). The further lack of correlation between 2°–10° misorientation metrics and olivine core Fo content argues against deformation temperature as the main control on olivine slip systems in ureilites. Our findings highlight the use of olivine petrofabric to gain insights into ureilite deformation, as well as complexities in interpreting olivine deformation data with respect to the history of the UPB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".