MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1937481124 · doi:10.1130/2006.2397(06)

Building the American Mineralogist Crystal Structure Database: A recipe for construction of a small Internet database

2006· book-chapter· en· W1937481124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hareesh Rajan, Hinako Uchida, Deborah Bryan, Ranjini Swaminathan, Robert T. Downs, Michelle Hall‐Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society of America eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetDatabaseConstruct (python library)World Wide WebSoftwareComputer scienceGeneral partnershipPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crystal structure data represent one of the most important resources for developing scientific knowledge and should be archived in ways that make them easy to access and preserve. The American Mineralogist Crystal Structure Database currently contains every crystal structure published in American Mineralogist, The Canadian Mineralogist, European Journal of Mineralogy, and Physics and Chemistry of Minerals. It is maintained by the American and Canadian mineralogical societies and is freely accessible through the Internet. The database consists of the data, server-side search and retrieval software and user-side analysis software. It is managed through a partnership of PHP and MySQL programming that provide dynamic construction of Web pages and search procedures. The purpose of this paper is to describe the database and its implementation and to illustrate how to construct similar small, interactive Internet databases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.027

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society of America eBooksSame topicRailway Systems and Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207