Synthetic and natural ammonium-bearing tourmaline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the similar ionic radius of K + and NH 4 + , K-silicates can incorporate a significant amount of NH4. As tourmaline is able to accommodate K in its crystal structure at high and ultrahigh pressure, we test if this also holds true for NH 4 . Piston-cylinder experiments in the system (NH 4 ) 2 O-MgO-SiO 2 -Al 2 O 3 -B 2 O 3 -H 2 O at 4.0 GPa, 700 °C, with B 2 O 3 and NH 4 OH in excess produce an assemblage of tourmaline, phengite, and coesite. The tourmaline crystals are up to 10 × 40 μm in size. EMP analyses indicate that the tourmalines contain 0.22 (±0.03) wt% (NH 4 ) 2 O and are solid solutions mainly along the magnesio-foitite and “NH 4 -dravite” join with the average structural formula X [(NH 4 ) 0.08(1) o 0.92(1) ] Y [Mg 2.28(8) Al 0.72(8) ] Z [Al 5.93(6) Si 0.07(6) ] T [Si 6.00(5) O 18 ](BO 3 ) 3 (OH) 4 . NH 4 incorporation is confirmed by characteristic stretching and bending modes in the IR-spectra of single crystals on synthetic tourmaline. Further evidence is the increased unit-cell parameters of the tourmaline [a = 15.9214(9) Å, c = 7.1423(5) Å, V = 1567.9(2) Å 3 ] relative to pure magnesio-foitite. Incorporation of NH 4 in natural tourmaline was tested in a tourmaline-bearing mica schists from a high-P/low-T (>1.2 GPa/550 °C) metasedimentary unit of the Erzgebirge, Germany, rich in NH 4 . The NH 4 -concentrations in the three main NH4-bearing phases are: biotite (~1400 ppm) > phengite (~700 ppm) > tourmaline (~500 ppm). This indicates that tourmaline can act as important carrier of nitrogen between the crust and the deep Earth, which has important implications for a better understanding of the large-scale light element cycle.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".