adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from off-nadir observations during Ls = 120°–150° of MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for the channel and time of day labeled. White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the southern polar cap).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from dayside off-nadir observations during MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for the season labeled. White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from nightside off-nadir observations during MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for the season labeled. White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Identical to Figure 12(a) except that the centers of a few example circular structures in GW activity near 15°N, 30°E have been marked with red crosses.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Spatial distribution of GW activity compared with surface roughness. (a) Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from dayside off-nadir observations in A1 during an Ls of 240°–270° of MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2). White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap). (b) The log10 of mean roughness (m2) at the baseline of off-nadir observations averaged at 1° resolution. (c) Identical to panel (a) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160°–40°W. (d) Identical to panel (b) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160–40°W.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Spatial distribution of GW activity compared with surface roughness. (a) Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from dayside off-nadir observations in A2 during an Ls of 240°–270° of MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2). White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap). (b) The log10 of mean roughness (m2) at the baseline of off-nadir observations averaged at 1° resolution. (c) Identical to panel (a) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160°–40°W. (d) Identical to panel (b) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160–40°W.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Spatial distribution of GW activity compared with surface roughness. (a) Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from dayside off-nadir observations in A3 during an Ls of 240°–270° of MYs 29–33 and 35 averaged at 1° resolution expressed as log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2). White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−6 K2 K−2, about an order of magnitude larger than the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap). (b) The log10 of mean roughness (m2) at the baseline of off-nadir observations averaged at 1° resolution. (c) Identical to panel (a) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160°–40°W. (d) Identical to panel (b) but focused on 30°S–30°N, 160–40°W.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Correlation product moment (weighted by cosine of latitude of the bin) between log10 of roughness (m2) averaged at 1° and log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) averaged at 1° resolution for the channel, time of day, region, and Mars Month labeled. Mars Month is defined as Ls = 0°–30° for Month 1, etc. Blue bars indicate the global correlation, while orange bars are for the region of the Tharsis Montes and Valles Marineris 30°S–30°N, 160°–40°W.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Normalized empirical probability density functions (%) of log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) in discrete log10 of surface roughness (m2) bins for all off-nadir observations at surface elevations of <12 km and MYs 29–33 and 35 for the channels and times of day listed. For clarity, the color scale has been saturated at 20%. The 0.1% probability contour is plotted in yellow to indicate the extremes of the distributions. The white line indicates a possible linear relation between the log10 of roughness (m2) and log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩, i.e., log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ = log10(roughness)−10.5
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Seasonal variability in global mean GW activity on the dayside. (a)–(f) ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) filtered so that the sum of the cosine of the latitude bins averaged to calculate the mean is at least 50 (≈86% coverage) and normalized by the mean for all time bins for the channel. The normalization factor is given in the legend. (g)–(h) Comparison of the seasonal cycle of global mean dayside ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) in a channel during the dust storm–quiet year of MY 30 compared with the seasonal cycle of global mean dayside ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ during MY 34 in a second channel whose vertical range should correspond to the first channel under high dust opacity conditions, as labeled. Note that 34P started around Ls = 187°, MY 34.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Seasonal variability in global mean GW activity on the nightside. (a)–(f) ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) filtered so that the sum of the cosine of the latitude bins averaged to calculate the mean is at least 50 (≈86% coverage) and normalized by the mean for all time bins for the channel. The normalization factor is given in the legend. (g)–(h) Comparison of the seasonal cycle of global mean nightside ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) in a channel during the dust storm–quiet year of MY 30 compared with the seasonal cycle of global mean nightside ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ during MY 34 in a second channel whose vertical range should correspond to the first channel under high dust opacity conditions, as labeled. Note that 34P started around Ls = 187°, MY 34.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from nightside off-nadir observations averaged at 5° resolution expressed as log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for the channel and time interval labeled in order to compare A1 GW observations during the MY 34 global dust event with A1 and A2 observations during the dust storm–quiet year of MY 30. White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−7 K2 K−2, the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Mean spatial distribution of GW activity viewed from dayside off-nadir observations averaged at 5° resolution expressed as log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for the channel and time interval labeled in order to compare A2 GW observations during the MY 34 global dust event with A2 and A3 observations during the dust storm–quiet year of MY 30. White space indicates that no data are available in the averaging bin. The lower end of the plotting color scale is saturated at 10−7 K2 K−2, the approximate uncertainty in the planet’s coldest areas (the winter polar cap).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Dayside GW activity during 34P near Fortuna Fossae and its context. (a) log10 (roughness) (m2) vs. log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for all dayside A1 off-nadir observations with maximum surface elevations <12 km in 3°–6°N, 90–95°W. The black line indicates log﹩{}_{10}\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ = log10 (roughness)-10.5. (b) ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for all dayside A1 off-nadir observations with maximum surface elevations <12 km in 3°–6°N, 90–95°W. (c) Same as panel (b) but for A2. (d) Same as panel (b) but for A3. Blue dots indicate observations in years other than MY 34, and red crosses indicate observations during MY 34.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Example calibrated radiance observations near Fortuna Fossae during 34P for the labeled channels and locations. The corresponding ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) for these observations is provided by color-coded text within the panels. The observations are plotted based on the intersections of each detector with the surface and relative to the intersection with the surface of detector 21 of the first observation.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Natural logarithm of the ratio between zonal mean ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) in A3 and A1 for the MYs and times of day labeled. The scales are saturated at e−2 to indicate high dissipation and e2 to indicate zero dissipation under ideal circumstances (no filtering). Dark/blue colors thus indicate high filtering, and light/yellow colors thus indicate low filtering. White space indicates missing data.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Nightside GW variability and intermittency at Ls = 0–30°. (a)–(c) ﹩\hat{{{\rm{\Omega }}}_{\mathrm{GW}}}﹩ (K2 K−2) averaged at 1° resolution for all off-nadir observations at surface elevations <12 km and MYs 29–33 and 35 for the labeled channel. (d)–(f) Intermittency (%) at 2° resolution for the labeled channel. The difference in resolution is to ensure sufficient sampling to reliably calculate intermittency.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Limb and off-nadir observations of a loop feature/presumptive cloud associated with high ΩGW in A3. (a)–(c) Cross sections of the brightness temperature in the labeled channel near 43°W, MY 34, LS = 150.27 (2018 March 28, 07:45–07:59 UTC). The color scale has been saturated at 120 and 180 K to emphasize the loop feature. The latitudes of the limb observations (at the tangent point of each detector) in panels (d)–(f) are indicated with horizontal lines , while the latitudes of off-nadir observations in panels (g)–(i) are depicted with slanted lines to show the projected observational path of off-nadir observations relative to the limb observations. The latitude axis has been reversed to show that the direction of spacecraft motion is toward the southern pole. ((d)–(f)) Comparison of two limb observations in the labeled channel. The dashed line plots a profile near the peak altitude of the loop. The squares plot a profile in the shadow region on the far side of the loop feature from the spacecraft. (g)–(i) Off-nadir observations in the labeled channel, contrasting a high-ΩGW observation (one of a pair) with observations from the pair to the south and north. The ΩGW for the observation is provided in the legend.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Off-nadir observations of a loop feature/presumptive cloud associated with high ΩGW in A3. Each panel shows the brightness temperature measured by the labeled detectors in the labeled channel during a portion of an MRO orbit near 43°W, MY 34, LS = 150.°27 (28 March 2018, 07:45–07:59 UTC). The latitudes of the observations have been shifted to correspond to where the path of the off-nadir observation would cross 60 km altitude, the estimated altitude of the cloud.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Normalized variance (K2 K−2) for the 20 point deg–1 mean surface temperature field for Mars generated by the KRC numerical thermal model (Kieffer 2013).
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Surface elevation relative to MOLA areoid vs. brightness temperature on the dayside for nadir observations within the region of 10°S–30°N, 150°–100°W during Ls = 135°–143° of MY 28 for the labeled channels. The 12 km surface elevation is marked with a black vertical line, and 5544 total brightness temperature measurements are plotted.
Paper: Mars Climate Sounder Observations of Gravity-wave Activity throughout Mars’s Lower Atmosphere
Authors: Nicholas G. Heavens, Alexey Pankine, J. Michael Battalio, Corwin Wright, David M. Kass, Armin Kleinböhl, Sylvain Piqueux, and John T. Schofield
Figure caption: Surface elevation relative to MOLA areoid vs. brightness temperature on the dayside for off-nadir observations within the region of 10°S–30°N, 150°–100°W during Ls = 135°–143° of MY 30 for the labeled channels. The 12 km surface elevation is marked with a black vertical line, and 7455 total brightness temperature measurements are plotted in each panel.
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: Example cross section of a complex crater on Titan. The crater ejecta are shown in green, and the crater melt pond is shown in blue. The red box zooms in on one section of the melt pond of thickness h (m) overlain on a fractured bedrock of water ice (white). Initial temperatures used in the model are shown for the melt (Tm), bedrock ice (Tb), and surface (Ts).
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: The SF2 model tracks the mushy water–ice interface (red box) within the finite region of space H (m) where each increment (dz) represents a volume average over some finite length (m). When the uppermost increment of the water–ice interface reaches a critical porosity (here ϕ ≤ 0.05), the water–ice interface (H) shifts downward by one spatial increment (dz), and the concentration of the frozen increment (ϕ ≤ 0.05) is assumed to be trapped in the ice and remains constant throughout the remainder of the simulation. This process continues throughout the depth of the pond h (m), beginning at some interface depth d (m). The model tracks the freeze front where buoyancy will drive impurities out of the ice. For salt, the model tracks the chamber roof’s freezing front as imaged here, but for HCN, the model is tracking the floor’s upward propagating freeze front. In our work, the model runs bottom-up because HCN is less dense than water and ice, resulting in upward gravity drainage (see the text for more details).
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: (Top) A diagram illustrating the SF2 model outputs of the concentration of HCN entrained in ice at a given thermal gradient, visualized across a range of increasing concentrations in the melt (color coded). The points ni show how the concentration of HCN trapped in ice will change as the freeze front progresses. (Bottom) We visualize four temporal steps of the ∼273 K water melt (blue) freezing into ice (white). As time (tn) passes, the warmer ice insulates the melt, reducing the thermal gradient at the freeze front. Simultaneously, the concentration of HCN in the melt (Cn) is increasing.
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: Concentration of HCN (ppt) in the frozen melt pond, for initial concentrations of 1 ppt (0.1%, yellow) to 250 ppt (25%, dark blue), at different thermal gradients (a), and depths (b). The SF2 model results are shown with black points (they appear as disjointed lines because the spatial resolution is so fine). The analytical fits from Buffo et al. (2020) are applied to our data, where solid lines are fits formed using SF2 results, and dashed lines are formed by extrapolating from the lower concentration fits (see Table 2 and the text).
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: Results of the Chivers et al. (2021) model showing how much HCN freezes into the ice with depth, measured through the center of the frozen melt sheet, for four different melt sheet thicknesses, (a) 10 m, (b) 25 m, (c) 50 m, and (d) 100 m and for initial concentrations of 0.1% (1 ppt, dark blue line with “x” at each point), 1.5% (15 ppt, light blue line), 2.5% (25 ppt, green dashed line), 5% (50 ppt, yellow dotted line), and 7.50% (75 ppt, red double-dashed line). Results are taken for an 80 km crater.
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: We use the Chivers et al. (2021) heat transfer model to calculate the final concentration distribution for an 80 km diameter crater (crater floor ∼55 km) using an initial concentration of 1 ppt (0.1%) and an assumed melt pond of 100 m depth. On the left is the concentration of HCN in each element, in the middle is the temperature of each element, and on the right is the phase of each element (0 is frozen, 1 is liquid). The model uses the thermal gradient on the interface boundary along with the constitutive equation of Table 2 to determine what the concentration will be upon freezing (see the text for further explanation).
Paper: Modeling the Distribution of Organic Carbon and Nitrogen in Impact Crater Melt on Titan
Authors: Joshua E. Hedgepeth, Jacob J. Buffo, Chase J. Chivers, Catherine D. Neish, and Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: The time needed to freeze each element along the melt sheet depending on its thickness. Times are taken from the centermost grid cells of the melt sheet, for an 80 km crater starting with 1 ppt of HCN, where timescales are measured at spatial steps throughout the melt sheet that range from 1 to 5 m (depending on the melt sheet thickness).