MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319927348 · doi:10.1127/0077-7757/2011/0192

Application of powder X-ray diffraction and the Rietveld method to the analysis of oxidation processes and products in sulphidic mine tailings

2011· article· en· W2319927348 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie - Abhandlungen Journal of Mineralogy and Geochemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsRietveld refinementPowder diffractionX-ray crystallographyDiffractionMetallurgyMaterials scienceChemistryCrystallographyPhysicsCrystal structureOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main strength of the Rietveld method as a tool for quantitative phase analysis lies in its ability to control and correct various parameters which influence powder diffraction patterns. The main sources of errors in this type of analysis are due to differences in properties of various constituents of a mineral mixture and the inability to model these consistently. Sources and products of acid mine drainage represent a system where these differences are especially prominent and therefore pose a problem for quantitative phase analysis. Large differences in hardness, mineral habit, and absorption of X-rays plus frequent amounts of poorly crystalline and amorphous components are the main reasons for erroneous results in this kind of samples. We have used a combination of procedures to overcome these difficulties: stepwise grinding of samples to avoid amorphisation of very soft components in the presence of very hard ones, preparation of moderately pressed samples to diminish porosity and surface roughness, application of numerical corrections for the absorption contrast and preferred orientation and the application of a specific addition method for the determination of unknown components in the mixture. The procedures should be tested on synthetic mixtures for each specific instrument/laboratory and type of analysis, as a standard part of the quantitative phase analysis and the necessary way for the estimation of expected errors. In our case mixtures of pyrite, dolomite, gypsum and amorphous silica were applied as proper models. The procedures developed on test mixtures result in estimated errors of determination typically lower than 2 wt%. The approach was applied to the analysis of the complex problem of estimating mass balance in oxidized mine tailings from the Nanisivik Mine, Nunavut, Canada revealing an oxidized proportion of 9 % of total pyrite content in the well drained tailings during a period of 8 years and a negligible oxidation in the water-covered tailings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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