JUABITE, CaCu10(Te4+O3)4(AsO4)4(OH)2(H2O)4: CRYSTAL STRUCTURE AND REVISION OF THE CHEMICAL FORMULA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structure of juabite, CaCu 10 (Te 4+ O 3 ) 4 (AsO 4 ) 4 (OH) 2 (H 2 O) 4 , triclinic, a 8.9903(7), b 10.1197(8), c 8.9959(7) A, α 102.654(1), β 92.432(1), γ 70.432(1)°, V 752.0(2) A 3 , space group P 1, Z = 1, has been solved by direct methods and refined by least-squares techniques on the basis of F 2 for 3358 unique reflections collected for a microcrystal using graphite-monochromated Mo K α X-radiation and a CCD area detector. The agreement index ( R 1) was 7.3%, calculated for 2288 unique observed [ F ≥ 4σ F ] reflections, and the goodness-of-fit ( S ) was 1.03. The structure determination has shown that the formula originally proposed for juabite is incorrect with regards to the oxidation state of Te, as well as the absence of Ca. The structure contains five unique Cu 2+ positions that are each in square pyramidal coordination. The two symmetrically distinct Te 4+ cations are in the usual one-sided coordination owing to the presence of a lone pair of electrons on the cation; there are three short Te 4+ –O bonds with lengths ~1.9 A in each polyhedron, as well as two or three longer bonds. The structure contains two unique As 5+ cations that are tetrahedrally coordinated by O 2− anions, and one Ca position that is octahedrally coordinated by O 2− anions. Juabite possesses a layered heteropolyhedral framework structure; layers parallel to (010) are weakly bonded in the [010] direction, resulting in a perfect {010} cleavage. Each layer contains all of the cation polyhedra of the structure, and involves two symmetrically identical sheets that contain four of the Cuϕ 5 square pyramids [ϕ: O 2− , (OH) − , H 2 O], both Te 4+ ϕ n polyhedra, and both AsO 4 tetrahedra. The sheets are parallel to (010), and chains of edge-sharing CaO 6 octahedra and Cuϕ 5 square pyramids extending parallel to [001] are sandwiched between adjacent symmetrically identical sheets, such that all anions contained within the chains are also linked to the sheets on either side, resulting in the heteropolyhedral layers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".