Limestones distinguished by magnetic hysteresis in three‐dimensional projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic hysteresis data determine the suitability of rocks for paleomagnetic work, provide clues to paleo‐environment and paleo‐climate and they may characterize depositional environments for limestones. However, the variables chosen for conventional two‐dimensional hysteresis plots, such as that of Day et al. [1977] , are not always suitable to discriminate between samples. Distinguishing samples by their regression surfaces in 3D hysteresis space may be more successful in some cases [ Borradaile and Lagroix, 2000 ] but a 2D projection with a less arbitrary viewing axis is preferable for routine reporting. We show that limestone samples are simply discriminated in a new 2D projection produced by projecting hysteresis data from three dimensions (x, y, z = Mr/Ms, Bcr, Bc) onto a plane containing the Mr/Ms axis. The orientation of the plane is controlled by its x‐axis that is defined by a suitably selected Bcr/Bc ratio, most often in the magnetite PSD range, 2< (Bcr/Bc) < 4.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".