Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structure of a morimotoite garnet, ideally Ca 3 (Ti 4+ Fe 2+ )Si 3 O 12 , from the Ice River alkaline complex, British Columbia, Canada was refined by the Rietveld method, space group $Ia\overline 3 d$ , and monochromatic synchrotron high-resolution powder X-ray diffraction (HRPXRD) data. Electron-microprobe analysis indicates a homogeneous sample with a formula {Ca 2.91 Mg 0.05 Mn 2+ 0.03 } Σ3 [Ti 1.09 Fe 3+ 0.46 Fe 2+ 0.37 Mg 0.08 ] Σ2 (Si 2.36 Fe 3+ 0.51 Al 0.14 ) Σ3 O 12 . The HRPXRD data show a two-phase intergrowth. The reduced χ 2 and overall R ( F 2 ) Rietveld refinement values are 1.572 and 0.0544, respectively. The weight percentage, unit-cell parameter (Å), distances (Å), and site occupancy factors (sofs) for phase-1 are as follows: 76.5(1)%, a = 12.156 98(1) Å, average = 2.4383, Ti–O = 2.011(1), Si–O = 1.693(1) Å, Ca(sof) = 0.943(2), Ti(sof) = 0.966(2), and Si(sof) = 1.095(3). The corresponding values for phase-2 are 23.5(1)%, a = 12.160 67(2) Å, average = 2.452, Ti–O = 1.988(3), Si–O = 1.704(3) Å, Ca(sof) = 1.063(7), Ti(sof) = 1.187(7), and Si(sof) = 1.220(8). The two phases cause strain that arises from structural mismatch and gives rise to low optical anisotropy. Because the two phases are structurally quite similar, a refinement using a single-phase model with anisotropic displacement parameters shows no unusual displacement ellipsoid for the O atom that requires a “split O-atom position”, as was done in previous studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".