MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016115752 · doi:10.2113/gscanmin.40.6.1687

THE NEW MINERAL SPECIES KEILITE, (Fe,Mg)S, THE IRON-DOMINANT ANALOGUE OF NININGERITE

2002· article· en· W2016115752 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masaaki Shimizu, Hajime Yoshida, J. A. Mandarino

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMineralGeochemistryGeologyChemistryMineralogyMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La keilite, (Fe,Mg)S, est une nouvelle espece minerale presente dans plusieurs meteorites. Dans la description originale de la niningerite, Keil et Snetsinger (1967) ont publie des donnees chimique a propos de la dans six chondrites a enstatite. Dans trois de ces six cas, Abee et Adhi-Kot, de type EH4, et Saint-Sauveur, de type EH5, le rapport atomique Fe:Mg montre plus de Fe que de Mg. Ce mineral represente donc l'analogue de la niningerite ayant une dominance de Fe. Par analogie avec le MgS synthetique et la niningerite, la keilite est cubique, groupe spatial Fm3m, a 5.20 A, V 140.6 A 3 , Z = 4. La keilite et la niningerite se presentent en grains atteignant quelques centaines de micrometres de diametre. A cause de cette taille infime, la plupart des proprietes physiques n'ont pas pu etre determinees. La keilite est metallique et opaque; en lumiere reflechie, elle est isotrope et grise. Les analyses modales des trois echantillons de meteorite par Keil (1968) indiquent les proportions suivantes de keilite (en % du volume): Abee 11.2, Adhi-Kot 0.95 et Saint-Sauveur 3.4. Les mineraux associes sont: enstatite, kamacite et troilite. L'echantillon type, provenant de la chondrite a enstatite de Abee, est preserve dans les collections de la Hawaii Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A. (specimen UH 13). De nouvelles donnees chimiques et optiques sont presentees ici.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations45
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207