An altitude‐normalized magnetic map of Mars and its interpretation

184 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Crustal structure of Mars from gravity and topography (2004, background): “[79] Apart from the giant impacts, the highland and lowland crustal thickness anomalies do not correlate significantly with magnetic anomalies [Connerney et al., 1999; Purucker et al., 2000].”
Crustal magnetic field of Mars (2004, methodology): “[16] The only previous similar Martian study was made using the vertical component of the low-altitude, uncalibrated and pre-processed, magnetic field measurements, and assumed vertical magnetizations [Purucker et al., 2000].”
EARLY CRUSTAL EVOLUTION OF MARS 1 (2005, background): “One of the puzzles of the magnetic anomalies is that they show almost no correlation with any other data set (Acuna et al. 1999, Purucker et al. 2000).”
Possible formation of ancient crust on Mars through magma ocean processes (2005, background): “This ancient crust, likely formed within the first few tens or hundreds of millions of years after accretion, contains the most strongly magnetized regions on Mars [Acuña et al., 1999; Purucker et al., 2000].”
Degree-1 mantle convection and the crustal dichotomy on Mars (2000, background): “However, the crust in this region does not have a structure that is obviously suggestive of plate tectonics [1] and other tectonic processes, such as magmatic intrusion [ 14 ], may alternatively explain the magnetic lineations.”