MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805353369 · doi:10.1017/s1431927618000417

Use of an Annular Silicon Drift Detector (SDD) Versus a Conventional SDD Makes Phase Mapping a Practical Solution for Rare Earth Mineral Characterization

2018· article· en· W2805353369 on OpenAlexaff
Chaoyi Teng, Hendrix Demers, Nicolas Brodusch, Kristian E. Waters, Raynald Gauvin

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFLSmidth
KeywordsSilicon drift detectorCharacterization (materials science)DetectorSiliconMaterials sciencePhase (matter)BeneficiationImage resolutionResolution (logic)GrindingScanning electron microscopeOpticsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OptoelectronicsNanotechnologyComputer sciencePhysicsChemistryMetallurgyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of techniques for the characterization of rare earth minerals (REM) have been developed and are widely applied in the mining industry. However, most of them are limited to a global analysis due to their low spatial resolution. In this work, phase map analyses were performed on REM with an annular silicon drift detector (aSDD) attached to a field emission scanning electron microscope. The optimal conditions for the aSDD were explored, and the high-resolution phase maps generated at a low accelerating voltage identify phases at the micron scale. In comparisons between an annular and a conventional SDD, the aSDD performed at optimized conditions, making the phase map a practical solution for choosing an appropriate grinding size, judging the efficiency of different separation processes, and optimizing a REM beneficiation flowsheet.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207