The “Analogs for VENus' GEologically Recent Surfaces” (AVENGERS) Initiative: Using Terrestrial Analogs to Study Recent Volcano‐Tectonic Activity on Venus and Inform the Characterization of Terrestrial Exoplanets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Several missions to Venus have recently been selected for launch, opening a new era for the exploration of the planet. A key question these missions seek to address is whether Venus is geologically active today. Detecting active volcanism on Venus would contribute to a better understanding of volcanic and atmospheric processes on Earth. The Analogs for VENus' GEologically Recent Surfaces (AVENGERS) initiative provides a comparative framework for the identification and analysis of terrestrial analog sites relevant to recent and possibly ongoing volcanic activity on Venus. Although this review focuses on terrestrial analogs for Venus exploration, the AVENGERS initiative also includes investigations that use Venus and Earth as analogs to better understand the evolution of terrestrial exoplanets. In addition, the AVENGERS initiative facilitates international collaboration by connecting Venus mission teams with the broader planetary and exoplanetary science communities. This review describes the scientific context of AVENGERS, details the selection criteria for terrestrial analog sites, and summarizes a set of suitable locations. Methodological approaches in analog studies that support the interpretation of Venus observations are also discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".