THE NOMENCLATURE OF EUDIALYTE-GROUP MINERALS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the final report on the nomenclature of eudialyte-group minerals by the Eudialyte Nomenclature Subcommittee established by the Commission on New Minerals and Mineral Names of the International Mineralogical Association. This report is an updated and slightly revised version of the one that was formally accepted by the Commission. Eudialyte-group minerals are Narich zirconosilicates with varying amounts of the cations Ca, Fe, Mn, REE, Sr, Nb, K, Y, Ti, H and W. They are trigonal, a ≈ 14 A, c ≈ 30 A (rarely 60 A), crystallizing in R¯ 3m, R3m or R3. In order to encompass most substitutions known thus far, the general formula of eudialyte (s.l.) is [N(1)N(2)N(3)N(4)N(5)]3[M(1a)M(1b)]3M(2)3M(3)M(4)Z3[Si24O72]O’ 4X2, X = Cl, F, OH or CO3; Z = 3. Lately, the number of minerals in this group has increased rapidly and is now approaching twenty. Three different principl es of naming minerals have been tested: (i) a hierarchical system with root names modified by use of modifiers and Levinson suffixes, (ii) a unique-name system with use of modifiers with or without Levinson suffixes, and (iii) a system based on the Linnean principle used in the biological world. We conclude that a hierarchical nomenclature system does not work for eudialyte group minerals. Such a system would be either a multi-level system that would become either very complicated and cumbersome, with disproportionately many root names, or a flatter system with fewer root names but monstrously long names with formulalike endings, e.g., eudialyte-NaNaNaNaNaCaMnNbSiF. Conventional unique names with a maximum of one cation prefix are recommended for the eudialyte-group minerals, and this prefix should refer to the M(2) site, as in ferrokentbrooksite. One anion prefix is acceptable as well. A Linnean system composed of a genus name with a species suffix, e.g., eudialyte khomyakovite, is evaluated. However, there is no tradition for binary names in mineralogy, and the system is not endorsed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.011 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".