Two cubic phases in kimzeyite garnet from the type locality Magnet Cove, Arkansas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structure of an optically anisotropic kimzeyite garnet from Magnet Cove, Arkansas, USA, where it was first discovered, was refined with the Rietveld method, cubic space group, Ia\overline 3 d, and monochromatic [λ = 0.41422 (2) Å] synchrotron high-resolution powder X-ray diffraction (HRPXRD) data. The Rietveld refinement reduced χ2and overallR(F2) values are 1.840 and 0.0647, respectively. The sample, with the general garnet formula[8]X3[6]Y2[4]Z3[4]O12, contains an intergrowth of two cubic phases that occur initially as oscillatory growth zoning, and patchy intergrowths arise later from fluid-enhanced dissolution and re-precipitation. The two compositions obtained with electron-probe microanalyses (EPMA) are Ca3.00(Zr1.31Ti4+0.46Fe3+0.22Mn3+0.01)∑2[Al0.76Fe3+1.01Si1.23]∑3O12for phase 1aand Ca2.99(Zr1.48Ti4+0.37Fe3+0.15)∑2[Al0.87Fe3+0.98Si1.15]∑3O12for phase 1b. The weight percentage, unit-cell parameter (Å), distances (Å), and site occupancy factors (s.o.f.s) for phase 1aare as follows: 42.6 (2)%,a= 12.46553 (3) Å, average 〈X—O〉 = 2.482,Y—O = 2.059 (2),Z—O = 1.761 (2) Å, Ca (Xs.o.f.) = 0.960 (4), Zr (Ys.o.f.) = 0.809 (3), and Fe (Zs.o.f.) = 0.623 (2). The corresponding values for phase 1bare 57.4 (2)%,a= 12.47691 (2) Å, average 〈X—O〉 = 2.482,Y—O = 2.062 (1),Z—O = 1.762 (1) Å, Ca (Xs.o.f.) = 0.957 (3), Zr (Ys.o.f.) = 0.828 (2) and Fe (Zs.o.f.) = 0.617 (2). The main structural differences between the two phases are in the unit-cell parameter, Δa= 0.01138 Å,Y(s.o.f.), andY—O distance. Structural mismatch between the two cubic phases in a crystal gives rise to strain-induced optical anisotropy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".