Effects of natural acids on surface properties of asbestos minerals and kaolinite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Serpentine, and other asbestos minerals, are considered potential hazards to human respiratory health. It has been postulated that the surface characteristics of these substances, such as surface charge and adsorbed metals, notably Fe and other transition metals, may be the major agents responsible for their toxicity. There is a general consensus that the amphibole group of minerals possesses a greater health risk than serpentines dominated by chrysotile. There have been suggestions that natural processes can alter the surfaces of these minerals and reduce their potency. This study examined the effects of carbonic acid, oxalic acid and hydrochloric acid on the surface characteristics of two trioctahedral minerals, actinolite (amphibole) and chrysotile (serpentine), and compared the results to a non-asbestiform, dioctahedral mineral, kaolinite. Results confirm that the treatments alter the mineral surfaces by changing the zeta potential of the asbestiform minerals from positive to negative and by removing considerable amounts on non-crystalline Fe and other metals. X-ray analyses indicated that mineral structure was little affected by the treatments, and TOF-SIMS revealed that treatments did remove surface adsorbed metals and cations in octahedral coordination within the samples.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".