Mineralogical investigations of Canadian till and lake- and stream-sediment reference materials: part 1. Standardized X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscope methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reference materials are used in geochemical studies as quality control in chemical analyses, and in mineralogical analyses for identification of unknowns and modal proportions. In this Metals in the Environment (MITE) project, the mineralogy of twelve geochemical reference materials were evaluated through X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscope analyses. The reference materials are derived from soil, till, and lake and stream sediments, and mineralogical analyses are based on the bulk sample and the clay-sized fraction. The effect of a pretreatment to remove X-ray amorphous organic matter from the clay-sized fraction prior to semiquantitative X-ray diffraction analyses was examined, and ways to assess the amount of this material in a sample were summarized through a literature review. In addition, the resolution of scanning electron microscope images of clay-sized materials using carbon and gold coatings were compared. A standardized procedure for mineralogical characterization of soil, till, and sediment materials is presented.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".