The crystal structure of mineral fibres: 1. Chrysotile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work reports the results of the structural study of three representative chrysotile samples of different provenance (Canadian UICC, and Italian Balangero and Valmalenco). Chemical composition was determined using EMPA and TG data. An innovative wet cryo-milling procedure was used to powder the flexible and durable chrysotile fibres. X-ray powder diffraction patterns were collected using both conventional and nonconventional sources. Collected data were used for Rietveld structural refinements and results were compared with available literature data. The three samples display similar structure models, although small differences were detected in the position of the oxygen atoms. Both the structural refinements and spectroscopic investigations confirms that Fe2+ and Fe3+ atoms in chrysotile are located in the octahedral cavities only, substituting for Mg2+. Regarding the atom coordinates, UICC chrysotile is the closest to the model reported by Falini et al. (2004). About the lattice parameters, the Valmalenco chrysotile is the closest, if compared with the Balangero and UICC, to both the model proposed by Whittaker (1956a,b) and Falini et al. (2004). This work is intended as a basis for subsequent studies aimed at understanding the toxicity of these mineral fibres.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".