MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fluorine-, yttrium- and lanthanide-rich cerianite-(Ce) from carbonatitic rocks of the Kerimasi volcano and surrounding explosion craters, Gregory Rift, northern Tanzania

2011· article· en· W2147951902 on OpenAlexaff
Anatoly N. Zaitsev, Anton R. Chakhmouradian, Oleg I. Siidra, John Spratt, C. T. Williams, C. J. Stanley, С. В. Петров, Sergey N. Britvin, E. A. Polyakova

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbonatiteGeologyFluoriteMineralImpact craterLavaGeochemistryYttriumWolframiteRaman spectroscopyVolcanoMineralogyMonaziteMaterials scienceTungstenAstrobiologyMantle (geology)Zircon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cerianite-(Ce), ideally CeO2, occurs as rounded grains up to 5 μm across in a block of highly altered calcite carbonatite lava from the Kerimasi volcano, and as euhedral crystals up to 200 μm across in carbonatite-derived eluvial deposits in the Kisete and Loluni explosion craters in the Gregory Rift, northern Tanzania. X-ray powder diffraction data (a = 5.434(5) Å) and Raman spectroscopy (minor vibration modes at 184 and 571 cm—1 in addition to a strong signal at 449 cm—1) suggest the presence of essential amounts of large cations and oxygen vacancies in the Kisete material. Microprobe analyses reveal that the mineral contains both light and heavy trivalent rare earth elements (REE) (7.9-15.5 wt.% LREE2O3 and 4.9-9.7 wt.% HREE2O3), and that it is enriched in yttrium (7.1 — 14.5 wt.% Y2O3) and fluorine (2.2—3.5 wt.%). Single-crystal structure refinement of the mineral confirms a fluorite-type structure with a cation—anion distance of 2.3471(6) Å. The cerianite-(Ce) is considered to be a late-stage secondary mineral in the carbonatitic rocks.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207