Spectroscopic 2D-tomography: Residual pressure and strain around mineral inclusions in diamonds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have studied high-pressure inclusions (Ca-silicates, coesite, graphite) in three large diamonds, one from the Kankan district, Guinea, and the other two from the Panda kimberlite, Ekati diamond mines, Canada. Using the in situ point-by-point mapping technique with a confocal Raman system, the mineralogy of the inclusions, as well as their area distribution pattern ( e.g. , of different Ca-silicate phases) and their order-disorder distribution pattern (shown for graphite/disordered carbon), were determined. Raman mapping of the host diamonds yielded 2D-tomographic pressure and strain distribution patterns and provided information on the residual pressure of the inclusions (∼ 2.3 GPa for a coesite inclusion and ∼ 2.6 GPa for a graphite inclusion). The inclusions are surrounded by haloes of significantly enhanced pressure, several hundred σm across. These haloes exhibit complex pressure relaxation patterns that consist of micro-areas affected by both compressive and dilative strain, with the latter being intensive enough to result in apparent “negative pressures”.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".