Examination of the proposition that Cu(II) can be required for charge neutrality in a sulfide lattice — Cu in tetrahedrites and sphalerite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synchrotron XPS and Cu L2,3-edge NEXAFS spectroscopic data for a natural tetrahedrite surface prepared by fracture under UHV were in accord with the composition of the mineral and its expected semiconductivity. The 2p binding energy for the 6-coordinate S atoms was found to be not detectably greater than that for the 4-coordinate S atoms, and surface species were not clearly discernible in either surface-optimized S 2p or Cu 2p spectra. The Cu 2p and Cu L2,3-edge spectra indicated that all Cu in the mineral was indisputably Cu(I). The Cu L2,3-edge spectra of relatively pure natural sphalerite treated with mildly acidic aqueous cupric solution revealed the presence of Cu(II) in the outermost layer of the fracture surfaces, but it was concluded that most of the Cu near the surface of the mineral was in formal oxidation state Cu(I), albeit with higher than normal d9 character. The Cu(I) absorption peak was at an energy much lower than for the tetrahedrite absorption edge, but still consistent with Cu(I) in 4-fold coordination by S. The Cu(II) was consistent with Cu bonded both to S atoms in the outermost layer of the sphalerite and to O atoms in chemisorbed water. S 2p spectra determined at different photon energies revealed high binding energy components arising from oligosulfide-like environments in the outermost layers, but not necessarily in a completely restructured lattice and not in a Cu oligosulfide only. The data indicated some loss of Zn in addition to the Zn that had been replaced by Cu in the outermost layers of the sulfide lattice. The presence of these oligosulfide-like environments precluded the detection of S with formal oxidation state greater than (-II) that might have arisen only from Cu(I) in the S lattice. No evidence was obtained for the presence of Cu(II) in a sulfide lattice, but it was not possible to exclude the possibility of a very low concentration because of the presence of the Cu(II) bonded to both S and O at the surface of the treated sphalerite.Key words: tetrahedrite, sphalerite, copper uptake, XPS, NEXAFS.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".