MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034003688 · doi:10.2138/am.2012.4276

Nomenclature of the amphibole supergroup

2012· article· en· W2034003688 on OpenAlexaff
F. C. Hawthorne, Roberta Oberti, George E. Harlow, Walter V. Maresch, Robert F. Martin, John C. Schumacher, Mark D. Welch

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Mineralogist · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupergroupNomenclatureAmphiboleGeologyGeochemistryPaleontologyZoologyBiologyTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new classification and nomenclature scheme for the amphibole-supergroup minerals is described, based on the general formula AB(2)C(5)T(8)O(22)W(2), where A = square, Na, K, Ca, Pb, Li; B = Na, Ca, Mn2+, Fe2+, Mg, Li; C = Mg, Fe2+, Mn2+, Al, Fe3+, Mn3+, Ti4+, Li; T = Si, Al, Ti4+, Be; W = (OH), F, Cl, O2-. Distinct arrangements of formal charges at the sites (or groups of sites) in the amphibole structure warrant distinct root names, and are, by implication, distinct species; for a specific root name, different homovalent cations (e.g., Mg vs. Fe) or anions (e.g., OH vs. Fe2+) are indicated by prefixes (e.g., ferro-, fluoro-). The Classification is based on the A, B, and C groups of cations and the W group of anions, as these groups show the maximum compositional variability in the amphibole structure. The amphibole supergroup is divided into two groups according to the dominant W species: (w)(OH,F,Cl)-dominant amphiboles and O-w-dominant amphiboles (oxo-amphiboles). Amphiboles with (OH, F, Cl) dominant at W are divided into eight subgroups according to the dominant charge-arrangements and type of B-group cations: magnesium-iron-manganese amphiboles, calcium amphiboles, sodium-calcium amphiboles, sodium amphiboles, lithium amphiboles, sodium-(magnesium-iron-manganese) amphiboles, lithium-(magnesium-iron-manganese) amphiboles and lithium-calcium amphiboles. Within each of these subgroups, the A- and C-group cations are used to assign specific names to specific compositional ranges and root compositions. Root names are assigned to distinct arrangements of formal charges at the sites, and prefixes are assigned to describe homovalent variation in the dominant ion of the root composition. For amphiboles with O dominant at W, distinct root-compositions are currently known for four (calcium and sodium) amphiboles, and homovalent variation in the dominant cation is handled as for the (w)(OH,F,Cl)-dominant amphiboles. With this classification, we attempt to recognize the concerns of each constituent community interested in amphiboles and incorporate these into this classification scheme. Where such concerns conflict, we have attempted to act in accord with the more important concerns of each community.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.007

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1,315
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican MineralogistSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207