MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083773099 · doi:10.1017/s1431927610000152

Polarized-Light Interferometry of Calcium Carbonate Deposition in Moss from a Waterfall on the Niagara Escarpment

2010· article· en· W2083773099 on OpenAlexaff
H. J. Swatland

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsInterference (communication)Materials sciencePolarizerInterference microscopyPerpendicularVateriteCalcium carbonateInterferometryPhysicsGeometryComposite materialAragonite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deposition of calcium carbonate from groundwater was examined on a moss, Didymodon tophaceus, from a Niagara Escarpment waterfall. A spectrophotometer on a polarizing microscope was used for interferometry. A second-order blue interference with an interference minimum around 620 nm was found when moss cell spaces were fully calcified. Filled cell spaces were often surrounded by empty cell spaces. Complete calcification of whole leaflets resulted in progressively higher orders of interference colors and a positive shift in interference minima. Calcified leaflets finally became cemented together, but each retained a weak extinction when rotated. Small calcareous spherulites (mean diameter 15.7 +/- 2.1 microm) were found between leaflets. Spherulites exhibited first-order white interference with a Maltese cross that rotated when the polarizer and analyzer were rotated in tandem. A Nikitin-Berek compensator was tilted at 5.5 degrees to give an interference minimum at 600 nm in the optical axis. Quadrants of spherulites with radii more or less in line with the tilting axis of the compensator had lower (P < 0.001) interference minima (535 +/- 27 nm) than quadrants with radii more or less perpendicular to the compensator (659 +/- 15 nm), thus indicating a radial internal structure. Spherulites were tentatively identified as vaterite.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207