From structure topology to chemical composition. XXVI. Crystal structure and chemical composition of a possible new mineral of the murmanite group (seidozerite supergroup), ideally Na<sub>2</sub>CaTi<sub>4</sub>(Si<sub>2</sub>O<sub>7</sub>)<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub>(H<sub>2</sub>O)<sub>4</sub>, from the Lovozero alkaline massif, Kola Peninsula, Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The crystal structure of a murmanite-related mineral (MRM) of the murmanite group (seidozerite supergroup), ideally Na2CaTi4(Si2O7)2O4(H2O)4, from Mt. Pyalkimpor, the Lovozero alkaline massif, Kola Peninsula, Russia, was refined in space group P $ {\bar 1} $ with a = 5.363(2), b = 7.071(2), c = 12.176(5) Å, α = 92.724(3), β = 107.542(7), γ = 90.13(2)°, V = 439.7(4) Å3 and R1 = 5.72%. On the basis of electron-microprobe analysis, the empirical formula calculated on 22 (O + F), with two constraints derived from structure refinement, OH = 0.11 per formula unit (pfu) and H2O = 3.89 pfu, is (Na2.12K0.07Sr0.01)Σ2.20Ca0.85(Ti3.01Nb0.39Mn0.20Fe2+0.19Mg0.17Zr0.01Al0.01)Σ3.98(Si4.20O14)[O3.90F0.10]Σ4[(H2O)3.89(OH)0.11]Σ4{P0.03}, with Z = 1. It seems unlikely that {P0.03} belongs to MRM itself. The crystal structure of MRM is an array of TS blocks (Titanium-Silicate) connected via hydrogen bonds. The TS block consists of HOH sheets (H = heteropolyhedral, O = octahedral) parallel to (001). In the O sheet, the Ti-dominant MO1 site and Ca-dominant MO2 site give ideally (Ca□)Ti2 pfu. In the H sheet, the Ti-dominant MH site and Na-dominant AP site give ideally Na2Ti2 pfu. The MH and A P polyhedra and Si2O7 groups constitute the H sheet. The ideal structural formula of MRM of the form A P 2MH2MO4(Si2O7)2(XOM,A)4(XOA)2(X P M,A)4 is Na2Ti2(Ca□)Ti2(Si2O7)2O4(H2O)4. MRM is a Ca-rich and Na-poor analogue of murmanite, ideally Na2Ti2Na2Ti2(Si2O7)2O4(H2O)4 and a Na-rich and (OH)-poor analogue of calciomurmanite, ideally (Ca□)Ti2(Na□)Ti2(Si2O7)2O2[O(OH)](H2O)4. MRM and (murmanite and calciomurmanite) are related by the following substitutions: O(Ca2+□)MRM ↔ O(Na+2)mur and O(Ca2+□)MRM + H(Na+2)MRM + O(O2–)MRM ↔ O(Na+□)cal + H(Ca2+□)cal + O[(OH)–]cal. MRM is a possible new mineral of the murmanite group (seidozerite supergroup) where Ti + Mn + Mg = 4 apfu.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".