CRYSTALLOGRAPHICALLY ORIENTED POLYPHASE RODS IN RED WILLEMITE FROM FRANKLIN, NEW JERSEY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The color of red willemite (Zn 2 SiO 4 ) from Franklin, New Jersey, has been attributed in the past to inclusions of franklinite. We have examined these inclusions, which are rod-shaped and 5–20 μm in diameter, and found them to contain multiple phases. Polarized-light microscopy shows the rods to be oriented uniformly parallel to the c axis of willemite, and to have hexagonal or pseudohexagonal cross-sections. Phases identified by standardless EDS analysis and electron back-scatter diffraction include franklinite, friedelite, zincian kutnohorite, serpentine and rhodonite, as well as a sparse, unidentified K-bearing phase. Possible explanations for the origin of the rods include exsolution, primary fluid inclusions, and epitactic growth contemporaneous with willemite crystallization. Although rod-like exsolution is known in some geological settings, and an original exsolved phase might have been altered to the present assemblage, some of the elements in that assemblage ( e.g., H, C, Cl, K, and Ca) are incompatible with the willemite structure at any temperature. An origin as fluid inclusions is supported by the shapes of the rods ( i.e. , negative crystals with a hexagonal cross-sections), the presence of phases containing OH, Cl, Ca, K, and CO 3 , and void space visible around solid phases. The tapered shapes of the rods seems inconsistent with epitaxy. We suggest that willemite-generating metasomatic fluids were preserved as inclusions rich in elements incompatible with willemite, and that subsequent conditions led to their crystallization, possibly by reaction with the host. Reaction ceased with complete consumption of the fluid, resulting in relict fluid inclusions that impart color on the macro scale.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".