Probing Anisotropic Surface Properties of Illite by Atomic Force Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the purpose of understanding the colloidal behaviors of illite in mineral processing, probing the surface charging property of illite is of great significance. This research explored the edge and basal surfaces of illite using an atomic force microscope (AFM). The interaction forces between Si/Si3N4 probes and illite edge/basal surfaces were measured, respectively, at different pH values in 10 mM KCl solutions. Theoretical Derjaguin–Landau–Verwey–Overbeek forces were matched up with the measured forces to derive the surface potentials of the two surfaces. On the illite basal surface, an attractive force occurred at pH 3.0, while repulsive forces dominated from pH 5.0 to 10.0. On the illite edge surface, a slight attractive force was also obtained at pH 3.0. However, the interaction changed into repulsion at pH 5.0, and this repulsive force increased gradually from pH 6.0 to 10.0. Illite basal and edge surfaces were both negatively charged, but the basal surface exhibited more negative charges than the edge surface from pH 3.0 to 10.0. Increasing solution pH from 3.0 to 10.0, there was no detection of the point of zero charge (PZC) of the illite basal surface; however, the PZC of the illite edge surface should have occurred at a pH slightly lower than 3.0. This is the first time that surface potentials of illite edge and basal surfaces were attained separately by direct force measurements. These findings provide insights into the colloidal behaviors of illite in mineral processing and oil sands extraction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".