Solid‐state nuclear magnetic resonance investigation of synthetic phlogopite and lepidolite samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the present work, our aim is to decipher the cationic ordering in the octahedral and tetrahedral sheets of two Al‐rich synthetic materials, namely, phlogopites of nominal composition K(Mg3‐xAlx)[Al1+xSi3‐xO10](OH)yF2‐y and lepidolites in the system trilithionite–polylithionite with composition K (LixAl3‐x)[Al4‐2xSi2xO10](OH)yF2‐y, by directly probing the aluminium distribution through 27Al and 17O magic‐angle spinning, multiple‐quantum magic‐angle spinning, and 27Al‐27Al double‐quantum single‐quantum nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) experiments. Notably, 27Al‐27Al double‐quantum single‐quantum magic‐angle spinning NMR spectra, recorded at 9.34 and/or 20.00 T, show the spatial proximity or avoidance of the Al species inside or between the sheets. In both studied minerals, the ensemble of NMR data suggests a preference for [4]Al in the tetrahedral sheet to occupy position close to the [6]Al of the octahedral sheets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".