MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171440904 · doi:10.1017/s0885715613000523

The mystery of birefringent garnet: is the symmetry lower than cubic?

2013· article· en· W2171440904 on OpenAlexafffund
Sytle M. Antao

Bibliographic record

VenuePowder Diffraction · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBasic Energy SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAndraditeEMPABirefringenceMaterials scienceCrystallographyElectron microprobePowder diffractionCondensed matter physicsCubic crystal systemRietveld refinementPoint reflectionCrystal structureOpticsQuartzPhysicsChemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cause of birefringence in several garnet-group minerals with general chemical formula, [8] X 3 [6] Y 2 [4] Z 3 [4] O 12 , which was observed over 100 years ago, is unknown, although many different reasons were proposed, including symmetry lower than cubic. In this study, electron microprobe analyses (EMPA) were obtained for a Ti-rich andradite, ideally Ca 3 (Fe 2 3+ )Si 3 O 12 , from Magnet Cove, Arkansas, USA, and the results show that the sample is inhomogeneous with two distinct compositions. The crystal structure was refined by the Rietveld method, cubic space group $Ia\overline 3 d$ , and monochromatic synchrotron high-resolution powder X-ray diffraction (HRPXRD) data, which shows a mixture of three distinct cubic phases that are intergrown together and cause birefringence because of strain arising from small structural mismatch. This mixture of three cubic phases was not observed by any other experimental technique. These results have many implications, including garnet phase transitions from cubic to lower symmetry in the mantle, which has important geophysical consequences.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePowder DiffractionSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207