MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115768115 · doi:10.3749/canmin.48.1.1

THE CRYSTAL STRUCTURES OF NIOBOPHYLLITE, KUPLETSKITE-(Cs) AND Sn-RICH ASTROPHYLLITE: REVISIONS TO THE CRYSTAL CHEMISTRY OF THE ASTROPHYLLITE-GROUP MINERALS

2010· article· en· W2115768115 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fernando Cámara, Elena Sokolova, Y. A. Abdu, F. C. Hawthorne

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsTriclinic crystal systemChemistryCrystallographyElectron microprobeCrystal structureDiffractometerMössbauer spectroscopyCrystal chemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Crystal (programming language)Orthorhombic crystal systemMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crystal structures of niobophyllite, K 2 Na Fe 2+ 7 (NbTi) (Si 4 O 12 ) 2 O 2 (OH) 4 O, kupletskite-(Cs), Cs 2 Na Mn 7 Ti 2 (Si 4 O 12 ) 2 O 2 (OH) 4 F, and Sn-rich astrophyllite, K 2 Na Fe 2+ 7 Ti 2 (Si 4 O 12 ) 2 O 2 (OH) 4 F, all members of the astrophyllite group, have been refined in space group P 1 to R 1 values 5.96, 3.33 and 3.53% for 3576, 3490 and 3791 observed [ F o > 4σ F ] unique reflections measured with Mo K α radiation on a Bruker AXS diffractometer with a CCD SMART APEX detector. The crystal structures of all three minerals are topologically identical to that of triclinic astrophyllite. The crystals used in the collection of the X-ray intensity data were analyzed by electron microprobe, Fe 3+ : (Fe 2+ + Fe 3+ ) ratios were measured by Mossbauer spectroscopy, and Li was determined by laser-ablation – inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry (LA–ICP–MS). The empirical formulae were calculated on an anion basis, (O + OH + F) = 31 apfu : niobophyllite, (K 1.79 Cs 0.03 ) ∑1.82 Na 1.01 (Fe 2+ 4.02 Mn 1.98 Fe 3+ 0.55 ) ∑6.55 (Nb 1.46 Ti 0.55 Ta 0.01 ) ∑2.02 [(Si 7.77 Al 0.20 ) ∑7.97 O 24 ] O 2.73 [(OH) 4.13 F 0.13 ] ∑4.26 ; kupletskite-(Cs), (Cs 1.42 K 0.36 Ca 0.08 Pb 0.06 Na 0.05 Sr 0.02 ) ∑1.99 (Na 0.73 Ca 0.27 ) ∑1 (Mn 3.74 Fe 2+ 1.82 Li 0.68 Zn 0.50 Fe 3+ 0.13 Mg 0.11 ) ∑6.99 (Ti 1.54 Nb 0.45 Zr 0.02 ) ∑2.01 [(Si 7.90 Al 0.05 ) ∑7.95 O 24 ] O 2.03 [(OH) 4.26 F 0.71 ] ∑4.97 ; Sn-rich astrophyllite, (K 1.70 Ca 0.04 Cs 0.03 Pb 0.01 ) ∑1.78 (Na 0.96 Ca 0.04 ) ∑1 (Fe 2+ 6.18 Mn 0.45 Fe 3+ 0.26 Ca 0.09 Zn 0.02 ) ∑7 (Ti 0.74 Sn 0.62 Nb 0.44 Zr 0.16 Ta 0.02 Mg 0.02 ) ∑2.00 [(Si 7.75 Al 0.16 ) ∑7.91 O 24 ] O 2 [(OH) 4.356 F 0.65 ] ∑5.00 ; Z = 1. In Sn-rich astrophyllite, Sn 4+ replaces Ti 4+ at the D site, and there is a corresponding expansion of the D octahedron: = 1.979 A, where φ represents O, F, OH. The discovery of Sn-rich astrophyllite indicates that there is potential for a new species in the astrophyllite group with Sn 4+ as the dominant cation at the D site. We have identified three distinct A sites, A (1), A (2) and A (3) with coordinations [13], [5] and [13], respectively, that are separated by ≤1.2 A such that locally adjacent sites cannot both be occupied. We suggest the possibility of Ca occupying the B site via the substitution B Ca 2+ + A □ → B Na + + A K + and producing a potential new mineral of the astrophyllite group. The general formula of the astrophyllite-group minerals should be written as A 2 B C 7 D 2 (T 4 O 12 ) 2 O 2 (OH) 4 X 0–1 as this (i) preserves the correct formula of the silicate radical in the structure, and (ii) identifies the O 2 anion component of the structure as not bonded to Si.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207