MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338857373 · doi:10.1180/minmag.2014.078.1.10

Putnisite, SrCa<sub>4</sub>Cr<sub>8</sub><sup>3+</sup> (CO<sub>3</sub>)<sub>8</sub>SO<sub>4</sub>(OH)<sub>16</sub>·25H<sub>2</sub>O, a new mineral from Western Australia: description and crystal structure

2014· article· en· W2338857373 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Elliott, Gerald Giester, Ralph Rowe, Allan Pring

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersUniversity of Adelaide
KeywordsMohs scale of mineral hardnessOrthorhombic crystal systemPleochroismCrystallographyElectron microprobeChemistryX-ray crystallographyAndraditeCrystal structureOctahedronMineralogyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceQuartzDiffractionPhysicsSkarnOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Putnisite, SrCa4Cr83+ (CO7)8SO4(OH)16·25H2O, is a new mineral from the Polar Bear peninsula, Southern Lake Cowan, Western Australia, Australia. The mineral forms isolated pseudocubic crystals up to 0.5 mm in size in a matrix composed of quartz and a near amorphous Cr silicate. Putnisite is translucent, with a pink streak and vitreous lustre. It is brittle and shows one excellent and two good cleavages parallel to {100}, {010} and {001}. The fracture is uneven and the Mohs hardness 1½−2. The measured density is 2.20(3) g/cm3 and the calculated density based on the empirical formula is 2.23 g/cm3. Optically, putnisite is biaxial negative, with α = 1.552(3), β = 1.583(3) and γ = 1.599(3) (measured in white light). The optical orientation is uncertain and pleochroism is distinct: X pale bluish grey, Y pale purple, Z pale purple. Putnisite is orthorhombic, space group Pnma, with a = 15.351(3), b = 20.421(4) Å, c = 18.270(4) Å, V = 5727(2) Å3 (single-crystal data), and Z = 4. The strongest five lines in the X-ray powder diffraction pattern are [d(Å)(I)(hkl)]: 13.577 (100) (011), 7.659 (80) (200), 6.667 (43) (211), 5.084 (19) (222, 230), 3.689 (16) (411). Electron microprobe analysis (EMPA) gave (wt.%): Na2O 0.17, MgO 0.08, CaO 10.81, SrO 5.72, BaO 0.12, CuO 0.29, Cr2O3 31.13, SO3 3.95, SiO2 0.08, Cl− 0.28, CO2calc 17.94, H2Ocalc 30.30, O=Cl−0.06, total 100.81. The empirical formula, based on O + Cl = 69, is: Cr8.023+Ca3.78Sr1.08Na0.11Cu0.072+Mg0.04Ba0.02[(SO4)0.96(SiO4)0.03]0.99 (CO3)7.98(OH)16.19Cl0.15·24.84H2O. The crystal structure was determined from single-crystal X-ray diffraction data (MoKα, CCD area detector and refined to R1 = 5.84% for 3181 reflections with F0 > 4σF. Cr(OH)4O2 octahedra link by edge-sharing to form an eight-membered ring. A 10-coordinated Sr2+ cation lies at the centre of each ring. The rings are decorated by CO3 triangles, each of which links by corner-sharing to two Cr(OH)4O2 octahedra. Rings are linked by Ca(H2O)4O4 polyhedra to form a sheet parallel to (100). Adjacent sheets are joined along [100] by corner-sharing SO4 tetrahedra. H2O molecules occupy channels that run along [100] and interstices between slabs. Moderate to weak hydrogen bonding provides additional linkage between slabs.

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207