MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014922678 · doi:10.1180/0026461067050346

Apatite-group minerals from nepheline syenite, Pilansberg alkaline complex, South Africa

2006· article· en· W2014922678 on OpenAlexafffund
Р. П. Лиферович, Roger H. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLakehead University
KeywordsFluorapatiteApatiteNephelineNepheline syeniteGeochemistryGeologyMineralogyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nepheline syenites of the Pilansberg alkaline complex (South Africa) have undergone extensive subsolidus equilibration and alteration with a deuteric Cl- and Na-rich fluid phase. Complex assemblages of secondary minerals result from the replacement of primary alummosilicates, rinkite, eudialyte and fluorapatite. The composition of apatite group minerals formed during these alteration processes reflects the Sr- and rare earth element (REE) content, Na/Cl ratio and pH of the deuteric fluids. Apatite-group minerals are observed to have formed in the following sequence: orthomagmatic fluorapatite; strontian britholite-(Ce); strontian fluorapatite; Sr-apatite; REE-rich Sr-apatite; Sr-Na-REE- rich minerals approaching the stoichiometry of belovite-(Ce) and deloneite-(Ce); britholite-(Ce). Increasing alkalinity of the deuteric fluids is reflected by increasing amounts of Sr replacing Ca in apatite and culminates in the formation of Sr apatite containing 62.1 wt.% SrO (∼4.17 a.p.f.u. Sr). Pilansberg apatite-group minerals form a near-complete solid solution between fluorapatite and a fluorine analogue of Sr apatite with limited solution towards belovite-(Ce), Si-rich belovite-(Ce) and strontian britholite-(Ce).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations40
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207