MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974305406 · doi:10.1107/s0108767302098380

Mixed complexes in the structures of Zr-phosphates and silicates

2002· article· en· W1974305406 on OpenAlexaff
E. R. Gobetchia, Yu. K. Kabalov, D.Y. Pushcharovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations of Crystallography · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryGeochemistryMaterials scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crystal structure of kutinaite was determined from powder data on a synthetic sample obtained from pure elements at 623 K. The data were collected on a Guinier diffractometer and reflection intensitites extracted by profile-fitting assuming a cubic P lattice. The structure was solved by direct methods and then refined by Rietveld method to Rp = 13.4% and RB = 1.8%. The cubic structure has a = 11.78079(2) and space group Pm3m, Z=4. Apart from partially ordered Cu vacancies, the atomic arrangement is practically consistent with Fm3m symmetry, and it is suggested that it is the true symmetry of the high-temperature modification which is supposed to host dynamically disordered vacancies. Cu atoms in partially occupied positions (24/32 per unit cell) are tetrahedrally coordinated by As, while the atoms in fully occupied positions have trigonal planar As coordinations. Ag forms octahedral Ag6 clusters (Ag-Ag bonds = 2.95-3.05 ) in octahedral cavities of the Cu-As framework. In the latter, alternativelly, supertetrahedra and cuboctahedra of As-coordinated Cu clusters can be delineated. 1/7 of As atoms are hexahedrally coordinated by Cu atoms, while 6/7 are in somewhat distorted icosahedral coordinaitons by 8 Cu and 4 Ag atoms. A multitude of metal-metal (Cu-Cu, Ag-Ag, and Ag-Cu) and metal-semimetal contacts allows an alternative description of kutinaite as a complex alloy with predominantly icosahedral mutually interpenetrating coordinations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations of CrystallographySame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207