Hilgardite polytype distribution in Sussex, New Brunswick evaporite deposits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hilgardite, Ca 2 B 5 O 9 Cl·H 2 O, has a zeolite-type framework structure consisting of cross-linked (010) layers of borate sheets having the fundamental building block (FBB) = 2Δ3☐:<Δ2☐>-<Δ2☐>. These layers are polar and the orientation, plus the number of layers in a sequence, determine the polytype. To date three hilgardite polytypes have been described: hilgardite-1 A , -3 A and -4 M . A reliable means of polytype identification by micro X-ray powder diffraction (mXRPD) is outlined. Two polytypes are identified in the Sussex New Brunswick potash deposits: hilgardite-1 A and -3 A . Both cells are refined with XRPD data: hilgardite-1 A , a 6.456(1), b 6.558(1), c 6.295(1) Å, α 61.62(1), β 118.76(1), γ 108.82(2)°, V 205.23(4) Å 3 and hilgardite-3 A , a 17.484(6), b 6.487(3), c 6.321(3) Å, α 60.78(3), β 79.58(3), γ 84.16(3)°, V 615.3(3) Å 3 . Hilgardite polytype assemblages are determined for 24 Millstream deposit core samples and 43 Penobsquis deposit core samples. The Millstream deposit occurs as an isolated, inner basin during evaporite formation. Borate formation from this marine environment was during the last stages of evaporation. Simple Mg-Ca borates precipitated from this highly saline brine. It underwent subsequent minor folding and all hilgardite samples are the hilgardite-1 A polytype. The Penobsquis deposit occurs as an open fore-basin. This larger, less saline basin also precipitated borate minerals during the final stages of evaporation. The borate assemblage here is much more complex with borate minerals that have essential Ca, K, Fe, Mg and Sr. This deposit was subjected to major folding and recrystallization. Both hilgardite-1 A and -3 A occur here. Polytype-3 A is concentrated in areas of maximum folding and it is proposed that pressure is the main control of hilgardite polytypes. Strontium substitution has no effect on polytype formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".