MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111102974 · doi:10.1180/minmag.2008.072.4.839

Recommended nomenclature for the sapphirine and surinamite groups (sapphirine supergroup)

2008· article· en· W2111102974 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupergroupPyroxeneIsostructuralCristobaliteGeologyNomenclatureCrystallographyMineralogyGeochemistryChemistryOlivineCrystal structurePaleontologyBiologyTaxonomy (biology)Zoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Minerals isostructural with sapphirine- 1A , sapphirine-2M, and surinamite are closely related chain silicates that pose nomenclature problems because of the large number of sites and potential constituents, including several (Be, B, As, Sb) that are rare or absent in other chain silicates. Our recommended nomenclature for the sapphirine group (formerly aenigmatite group) makes extensive use of precedent, but applies the rules to all known natural compositions, with flexibility to allow for yet undiscovered compositions such as those reported in synthetic materials. These minerals are part of a polysomatic series composed of pyroxene or pyroxene-like and spinel modules, and thus we recommend that the sapphirine supergroup should encompass the polysomatic series. The first level in the classification is based on polysome, i.e. each group within the supergroup corresponds to a single polysome. At the second level, the sapphirine group is divided into subgroups according to the occupancy of the two largest M sites, namely, sapphirine (Mg), aenigmatite (Na), and rhönite (Ca). Classification at the third level is based on the occupancy of the smallest M site with most shared edges, M7 , at which the dominant cation is most often Ti (aenigmatite, rhönite, makarochkinite), Fe 3+ (wilkinsonite, dorrite, høgtuvaite) or Al (sapphirine, khmaralite); much less common is Cr (krinovite) and Sb (welshite). At the fourth level, the two most polymerized T sites are considered together, e.g. ordering of Be at these sites distinguishes høgtuvaite, makarochkinite and khmaralite. Classification at the fifth level is based on X Mg = Mg/(Mg + Fe 2+ ) at the M sites (excluding the two largest and Ml ). In principle, this criterion could be expanded to include other divalent cations at these sites, e.g. Mn. To date, most minerals have been found to be either Mg-dominant (X Mg > 0.5), or Fe 2+ -dominant (X Mg < 0.5), at these M sites. However, X Mg ranges from 1.00 to 0.03 in material described as rhönite, i.e. there are two species present, one Mg-dominant, the other Fe 2+ -dominant. Three other potentially new species are a Mg-dominant analogue of wilkinsonite, rhönite in the Allende meteorite, which is distinguished from rhonite and dorrite in that Mg rather than Ti or Fe 3+ is dominant at Ml , and an Al-dominant analogue of sapphirine, in which Al > Si at the two most polymerized T sites vs . Al < Si in sapphirine. Further splitting of the supergroup based on occupancies other than those specified above is not recommended.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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)0.0050.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.175 · 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