The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A model of the Chicxulub impact structure (Yucatan, Mexico) based on its gravity and magnetic signatures
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“At Chicxulub, there are ring structures in the potential field geophysical data that have been related to crater structure.”
From Observations and interpretations at Vredefort, Sudbury, and Chicxulub: Towards an empirical model of terrestrial impact basin formation (2008) · cites this paper as Espindola et al. 1995
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Cady, 1977, Calculation of gravity and magnetic anomalies along profiles with end corrections and inverse solutions for density and magnetization, 110, 10.3133/ofr77463 · DOI
- Elkins, 1951, The second derivative method of gravity interpretation, Geophysics, 16, 29, 10.1190/1.1437648 · DOI
- Evjen, 1936, The place of the vertical gradient in gravitational interpretation, Geophysics, 1, 127, 10.1190/1.1437067 · DOI
- Grieve, 1987, Terrestrial impact structures, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 15, 245, 10.1146/annurev.ea.15.050187.001333 · DOI
- Hildenbrand, 1983, FFTFIL. A filtering program based on two-dimensional Fourier analysis of geophysical data, US Geol. Surv. Open File Rep. 83-237, 10.3133/ofr83237 · DOI
- Hildebrand, 1991, Chicxulub crater: a possible Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary impact crater on the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, Geology, 19, 867, 10.1130/0091-7613(1991)019<0867:CCAPCT>2.3.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- Pilkington, 1992, The geophysical signature of terrestrial impact craters, Rev. Geophys., 30, 161, 10.1029/92RG00192 · DOI · Paper page
- Rasmussen, 1979, End corrections in potential field modeling, Geophys. Prospect., 27, 749, 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1979.tb00994.x · DOI
- Sharpton, 1992, New links between the Chicxulub impact structure and the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary, Nature, 359, 819, 10.1038/359819a0 · DOI
- Sharpton, 1993, Chicxulub multiring impact basin. Size and other characteristics derived from gravity analysis, Science, 261, 1564, 10.1126/science.261.5128.1564 · DOI · Paper page
- Shuey, 1973, End corrections in magnetic profile interpretation, Geophysics, 38, 507, 10.1190/1.1440356 · DOI
- Tanner, 1988, Gravity anomaly map for North America, The Leading Edge, Vol. 7, 15, 10.1190/1.1439456 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
GRIEVE, R. A. F., REIMOLD, W. U., MORGAN, J., RILLER, U., & PILKINGTON, M. (2008) · Meteoritics & Planetary Science · doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2008.tb01086.x · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Espindola, J. M., Mena, M., de La Fuente, M., & Campos-Enriquez, J. O.
- Venue
- Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1995-12
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 271-278
- ISSN
- 0031-9201
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review