MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029059744 · doi:10.1088/0953-8984/24/5/052202

Evidence for direct impact damage in metamict titanite CaTiSiO<sub>5</sub>

2011· article· en· W2029059744 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear materials and radiation effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTitaniteMetamictizationRadiogenic nuclideRecrystallization (geology)ZirconGeologyMineralogyCrystallographyMaterials scienceGeochemistryChemistryMantle (geology)Petrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have measured the dose dependence of the degree of amorphization of titanite, CaTiSiO(5). Titanite is an often metamict mineral which has been considered as a matrix for the encapsulation of radiogenic waste, such as Pu. The amorphous fraction p of geologically irradiated samples (ages between 0.3 and 1 Ga) follows p = 1 - exp(-B(a)D) where D is the total dose and the characteristic amorphization mass is B(a) = 2.7(3) × 10(-19) g. Amorphization follows the direct impact mechanism where each α-decay leads to a recoil of the radiogenic atoms (mostly Th and U), which then, in turn, displaces some 5000 atoms of the titanite matrix. The amorphization behaviour is almost identical with that of zircon, ZrSiO(4), which has a similar molecular mass. While the recrystallization mechanism and elastic behaviour of the two minerals are very different, we do not find significant differences for the amorphization mechanism. Our samples have undergone little reheating over their geological history, since heating over 800 K would lead to rapid recrystallization for which we have found no evidence.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.238 · 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