Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetites with sizes from 1 μm to 135 μm were cooled in zero field and their magnetizations M ( T ) measured continuously. M ( T ) changed reversibly in cooling from T 0 = 300 K to 200 K, and in subsidiary warming‐cooling cycles T i → T 0 → T i for any T i . Changes in M ( T ) in cooling from 200 K to 130 K were largely irreversible due to decreasing magnetocrystalline anisotropy which promotes wall unpinning and domain nucleation. Low‐temperature demagnetization (LTD) is almost complete by 130 K in 20–135 μm magnetites but in 1–14 μm magnetites further LTD occurs on cooling to 120 K as magnetocrystalline easy axes change and domains reorganize at the Verwey transition. The observed irreversible changes are the basis of stepwise LTD as a method of paleomagnetic “cleaning.” Decrements Δ M in remanence due to cooling are most accurately measured at T 0 , requiring a set of warming‐cooling cycles T i → T 0 → T i . A less accurate method, continuous LTD, measures decrements M ( T i ) − M ( T i−1 ) from the main cooling curve below 200 K, without intermediate warming‐cooling cycles; this requires remanence measurements at T i < T 0 . Stepwise or continuous LTD curves M ( T i ) discriminate among remanence types and grain sizes. The signal of finer (PSD) grains is enhanced compared to coarser (MD) grains. Analogous to the Lowrie and Fuller [1971] test, the inverse thermoremanence (ITRM) of 1–14 μm grains is harder to stepwise LTD than saturation remanence (SIRM), while anhysteretic remanence (ARM) is harder than either; for 20–135 μm multidomain grains, ITRM is softer than SIRM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".