The discreditation of oboyerite and a note on the crystal structure of plumbotellurite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The mineral ‘oboyerite’, first described in 1979 from the Grand Central mine, Tombstone, Cochise County, Arizona, USA, has been re-examined. The type specimen from the Natural History Museum, London and a specimen from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (traceable to S. A Williams, who first described ‘oboyerite’) were analysed in this study. The discreditation of ‘oboyerite’ as a valid mineral species has been approved by the Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification of the International Mineralogical Association (Proposal 19-D). Single-crystal X-ray diffraction, powder X-ray diffraction, electron probe microanalysis and scanning electron microscopy were all employed to show that ‘oboyerite’ is formed of at least two distinct phases, including the lead–tellurium oxysalt minerals ottoite and plumbotellurite. During the course of the discreditation, plumbotellurite was confirmed to be identical to the synthetic compound α-Pb2+Te4+O3. Previously, in some mineralogical literature plumbotellurite was described as orthorhombic with no known crystal structure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".