MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962896646 · doi:10.17632/7ctjbsn7c9.1

Chaotic Terrain in Southern Circum-Chryse, Mars

2025· dataset· en· W6962896646 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMendeley Data · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainMars Exploration ProgramChaoticHesperianImpact craterVolume (thermodynamics)Noachian

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of large outflow channels on Mars shows the importance of water in shaping the surface of the planet over geologic time. Chaotic terrain has been identified as the source region for flood waters responsible for carving out many of these channels. There are still many unanswered questions regarding chaotic terrains on Mars. Using the most up to date CTX, HRSC, and MOLA coverage, DEM and TIN models were used to investigate examples of smooth-topped chaotic terrains which include: Hydraotes Chaos, a crater pair in Hydaspis Chaos, Baetis Chaos, and Candor Chaos, all south of Chryse Planitia. The findings of this study suggest that the collapse of chaotic terrains is not regionally controlled. This study also suggests that the largest chaotic terrains do not require external heat sources to form. Finally, there is evidence that chaotic terrain forming events have occurred from the Middle Noachian to the Late Hesperian/Early Amazonian. This data set contains the raw data for the Chaotic terrains studied here. Specifically, for each terrain the following files are included: Baetis • Baeties+East_Statistics_All_Mesas o Spreadsheet of all Baetis and East Chaos mesas as well as some flat areas of the channel floor. • baetis+east_volume_depth_calc o Spreadsheet of volume calculations • Mosaic and DEM composites • Image of Mesa locations • TIN of Baetis and East Chaos • Volume surfaces used in volume calculation Candor • Candor_Statistics_All_Mesas o Spreadsheet of all Candor Chaos mesas as well as some flat areas of the floor. • Candor_volume_calc o Spreadsheet of volume calculations • Mosaic and DEM composites • Image of Mesa locations • TIN of Candor Chaos Hydaspis • Hydaspis_Statistics_All_Mesas o Spreadsheet of all Hydaspis Chaos mesas as well as some flat areas of the plateau. • Hydaspis_Calculation_Volume_Polygon o Spreadsheet of volume calculations • Hydaspis_Terrace_Measurements o Spreadsheet of elevation points of terraces • Mosaic and DEM composites • Image of Mesa locations • TIN of Hydaspis Chaos • Volume surfaces used in volume calculation Hydraotes • Hydraotes_Statistics_All_Mesas o Spreadsheet of all Hydraotes mesas as well as some flat areas of the plateau. • Hydraotes_Calculation_Volume o Spreadsheet of volume calculations • Hydraotes_Terrace_Elevation_Points o Spreadsheet of elevation points of terraces • Mosaic and DEM composites • Image of Mesa locations • TIN of Hydraotes Chaos

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 venueMendeley DataFrench-language works237,207