MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079246956 · doi:10.1134/s0016702906030037

Kaidun meteorite: Crystals of oxides in cavities

2006· article· en· W2079246956 on OpenAlexaff
А. В. Иванов, M. E. Zolensky, Н. Н. Кононкова, S. Vincent Yang, I. A. Stroganov

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoriteGeologyBrecciaMineralCrystallizationAcicularComposition (language)ChondriteParent bodyClastic rockMineralogyGeochemistryCrystallographyMaterials scienceAstrobiologyChemistrySedimentary rockMicrostructurePhysicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cavities in two texturally and genetically distinct clasts of the Kaidun meteorite were found out to contain crystals of distinct morphology, but of a similar composition. Cavities in chondrite breccia #d3A contain thin (<4 μm) elongated (up to 25 μm long) crystals that grew perpendicular to the walls of the cavity. The walls of the cavities in partly fused clast #d(3–5)D are covered with clusters of acicular crystals. In both clasts, the crystals are covered by films of phyllosilicates and always have a composition approximated by the formula (Mg,Fe,Mn) 5 Al 2 O 8 · n H 2 O. No mineral phase of this composition has ever been found in nature. The genesis of the mineral phases in the cavities is thought to be related to the crystallization from a fluid of similar composition. The fluid was produced during the cooling of the melt that produced clast #d(3–5)D. The unusual composition of the crystals testifies that this fluid had an unusual composition. This can be explained by the unique nature of clast #d(3–5)D, for which there are good reasons to propose a Martian origin.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry InternationalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207