The Preparation and Preliminary Characterisation of Eight Geological MPI‐DING Reference Glasses for In‐Situ Microanalysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eight silicate glasses were prepared by directly fusing and stirring 50‐100 g each of basalt, andesite, komatiite, peridotite, rhyolite, and quartz‐diorite. These are referred to as MPI‐DING glasses and were made for the purpose of providing reference materials for geochemical, in‐situ microanalytical work. Results from various analytical techniques indicate that individual glass fragments are well homogenised with respect to major and trace elements at the μm to mm scale. Heterogeneities due to quench crystallisation of olivine have been observed in small and limited areas of the two komatiitic glasses. In order to obtain concentration values for as many elements as possible, the glasses were analysed by a variety of bulk and microanalytical methods in a number of laboratories. The analytical uncertainties of most elements are estimated to be between 1% and 10%. From the analytical data, preliminary reference values for more than sixty elements were calculated. The analytical uncertainties of most elements are estimated to be between 1% and 10%.
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 | 0.001 | 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".