MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507685152 · doi:10.1180/minmag.2016.080.026

From structure topology to chemical composition. XX. Titanium silicates: the crystal structure of hejtmanite, Ba<sub>2</sub>Mn<sub>4</sub>Ti<sub>2</sub>(Si<sub>2</sub>O<sub>7</sub>)<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub>(OH)<sub>2</sub>F<sub>2</sub>, a Group-II TS-block mineral

2016· article· en· W2507685152 on OpenAlexafffund
Elena Sokolova, Fernando Cámara, F. C. Hawthorne, Leonid A. Pautov

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsTriclinic crystal systemCrystallographyElectron microprobeCrystal structureChemical compositionCrystal chemistryCrystal (programming language)Materials scienceTitaniumChemistryMineralogyMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The crystal structure of hejtmanite, Ba2Mn4Ti2(Si2O7)2O2(OH)2F2, from Mbolve Hill, Mkushi River area, Central Province, Zambia (holotype material) has been refined on a twinned crystal to R1 = 1.88% on the basis of 4539 [|F| > 4|F|] reflections. Hejtmanite is triclinic, C1̅, a = 10.716(2), b = 13.795(3), c = 11.778 (2) , = 90.07(3), = 112.24(3), = 90.03(3), V = 1612(2) 3. Chemical analysis (electron microprobe) gives: Ta2O5 0.09, Nb2O5 1.27, ZrO2 0.65, TiO2 14.35, SiO2 23.13, BaO 26.68, SrO 0.19, FeO 11.28, MnO 15.12, Cs2O 0.05, K2O 0.33, F 3.82, H2Ocalc. 1.63, O = F 1.61, total 97.10 wt.%, where the H2O content was calculated from the crystal-structure refinement, with (OH F) = 4 apfu. The empirical formula, calculated on the basis of 20 (O F) anions, is of the form (Si2O7)2(XO)4(XP)2, Z=4: (Ba1.82K0.07 Sr0.02)Σ1.91(Mn2.33 Zr0.04Mg0.03)Σ3.95(Ti1.88Nb0.10Zr0.02)Σ2(Si2.02O7)2O2[(OH)1.89 F0.11]Σ2F2. The crystal structure is a combination of a TS (Titanium Silicate) block and an I (intermediate) block. The TS block consists of HOH sheets (H heteropolyhedral, O octahedral). The topology of the TS block is as in Group-II TS-block minerals: Ti ( Nb) = 2 apfu per (Si2O7)2 [as defined by Sokolova (2006)]. In the O sheet, five [6]MO sites are occupied mainly by Mn, less Fe2 and minor Zr and Mg, with = 2.198 (φ = O,OH), ideally giving Mn4 apfu. In the H sheet, two [6]MH sites are occupied mainly by Ti, with Hφ> = 1.962 (φ = O,F), ideally giving Ti2 apfu; four [4]Si sites are occupied by Si, with < SiO> = 1.625 . The MH octahedra and Si2O7 groups constitute the H sheet. The two [12]Ba-dominant AP(1,2) sites, with Pφ> = 2.984 (φ = O, F), ideally give Ba2 apfu. Two (1,2) and two (1,2) sites are occupied by O atoms and OH groups with minor F, respectively, ideally giving (XO)4 = ( )2 ( )2=O2(OH)2 pfu. Two (1,2) sites are occupied by F, giving F2 apfu. TS blocks link via a layer of Ba atoms which constitute the I block. Simplified and end-member formulae of hejtmanite are Ba2(Mn,Fe2)4Ti2 (Si2O7)2O2(OH,F)2 F2 and Ba2Mn4Ti2(Si2O7)2O2(OH)2F2, Z = 4. Hejtmanite is a Mn-analogue of bafertisite, Ba2 4 Ti2(Si2O7)2O2(OH)2F2.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207