First‐order reversal curve (FORC) diagrams of elongated single‐domain grains at high and low temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First‐order reversal curve (FORC) diagrams are a new technique for identifying magnetic minerals and characterizing their domain structures and interactions. FORC diagrams have potentially important applications for determining magnetic mineral compositions and grain sizes in paleomagnetism and environmental magnetism. However, the interpretation of the FORC parameters Hc and Hu as being equivalent to microcoercivity and particle interaction field, respectively, needs to be thoroughly tested in order to validate the FORC method. In order to test this interpretation, we measured FORC diagrams on elongated single‐domain particles at temperatures ranging from 20 to 853 K (580°C). The FORC distribution contracts significantly along both axes above 430°C, and the bulk coercive force decreases rapidly. The main causes of these features are decreasing spontaneous magnetization Ms(T) and increasing thermal activation of single‐domain moments pinned by shape anisotropy. A profile through the FORC peak along the Hc axis can be integrated to give a synthetic alternating field demagnetization curve or isothermal remanence curve. The synthesized curves match measured curves quite well at a variety of temperatures, and the FORC median Hc varies approximately in proportion to the bulk coercive force. A profile through the FORC peak parallel to the Hu axis contracts with heating approximately as Ms(T), and the half width of the distribution is similar to independent measures of local interaction fields Hi. These properties support the interpretation of the FORC variables Hc and Hu as being equivalent to microcoercivity Hc and interaction field Hi, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".