Cadwaladerite, Al2(H2O)(OH)4·n(Cl,OH–,H2O), from Cerros Pintados, Chile, defined as a valid mineral species and the discreditation of lesukite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cadwaladerite, described in 1941 as Al(OH)2Cl·4H2O, and lesukite, described in 1997 as Al2(OH)5Cl·2H2O, are very closely related chemically and structurally, but are found in very different environments. Cadwaladerite was found at the edge of a salar in Chile. Lesukite has been described from a volcanic fumarole and from burning coal seams. Both materials have cubic symmetry with a = 19.788 to 19.859Å. The crystal structure, common to both, consists of a rigid three-dimensional framework of edge- and corner-sharing Al(OH,H2O)6 octahedra that contains large interconnected cavities where loosely held Cl, OH, and H2O are located. The fact that Cl is loosely held within the structure is demonstrated by a dramatic reduction in Cl content after washing the material in distilled water, while the structural integrity is maintained. Herein, cadwaladerite is confirmed as a valid mineral species and lesukite is discredited because the only difference between the two materials is the loosely held extra-framework Cl, OH, and H2O. Cadwaladerite, Al2(H2O)(OH)4·n(Cl,OH,H2O) (Z = 48) takes precedence over lesukite based on the date of description. Material similar to cadwaladerite is found as a corrosion product on some types of nuclear fuel elements and is also closely related to the molecular species used in antiperspirant and water filtration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".