The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Elemental composition of the lunar surface: Analysis of gamma ray spectroscopy data from Lunar Prospector
Open accessAbstract
Gamma ray spectroscopy data acquired by Lunar Prospector are used to determine global maps of the elemental composition of the lunar surface. Maps of the abundance of major oxides, MgO, Al 2 O 3, SiO 2, CaO, TiO 2, and FeO, and trace incompatible elements, K and Th, are presented along with their geochemical interpretation. Linear spectral mixing is used to model the observed gamma ray spectrum for each map pixel. The spectral shape for each elemental constituent is determined by a Monte Carlo radiation transport calculation. Linearization of the mixing model is accomplished by scaling the spectral shapes with lunar surface parameters determined by neutron spectroscopy, including the number density of neutrons slowing down within the surface and the effective atomic mass of the surface materials. The association of the highlands with the feldspathic lunar meteorites is used to calibrate the mixing model and to determine backgrounds. A linear least squares approach is used to unmix measured spectra to determine the composition of each map pixel. The present analysis uses new gamma ray production cross sections for neutron interactions, resulting in improved accuracy compared to results previously submitted to the Planetary Data System. Systematic variations in lunar composition determined by the spectral unmixing analysis are compared with the lunar soil sample and meteorite collections. Significant results include improved accuracy for the abundance of Th and K in the highlands; identification of large regions, including western Procellarum, that are not well represented by the sample collection; and the association of relatively high concentrations of Mg with KREEP‐rich regions on the lunar nearside, which may have implications for the concept of an early magma ocean.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Keshava, N., & Mustard, J. F. (2002) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/79.974727 · Cited by 2,549
Hess, P. C., & Parmentier, E. M. (1995) · Earth and Planetary Science Letters · doi:10.1016/0012-821x(95)00138-3 · Cited by 433
Cited by
Crawford, I. A. (2015) · Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment · doi:10.1177/0309133314567585 · Cited by 348
Fang, T., & Fa, W. (2014) · Icarus · doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2013.12.024 · Cited by 78
Wu, Y. (2012) · Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.gca.2012.07.011 · Cited by 54
Lunar meteorites from northern Africa
Korotev, R. L., & Irving, A. J. (2021) · Meteoritics & Planetary Science · doi:10.1111/maps.13617 · Cited by 51
Jun, I., Mitrofanov, I., Litvak, M. L., Sanin, A. B., Kim, W., Behar, A., Boynton, W. V., DeFlores, L., Fedosov, F., Golovin, D., et al. (2013) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets · doi:10.1002/2013je004510 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Prettyman, T. H., Hagerty, J. J., Elphic, R. C., Feldman, W. C., Lawrence, D. J., McKinney, G. W., & Vaniman, D. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- E12
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1967349249
- Cited by
- 461
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Elemental composition of the lunar surface: Analysis of gamma ray spectroscopy data from Lunar Prospector. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005je002656
- The paper
- Prettyman, T. H., Hagerty, J. J., Elphic, R. C., Feldman, W. C., Lawrence, D. J., McKinney, G. W., & Vaniman, D. T. (2006). Elemental composition of the lunar surface: Analysis of gamma ray spectroscopy data from Lunar Prospector. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005je002656
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.