MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015565373 · doi:10.3749/canmin.1900076

Alkali sulfates with aphthitalite-like structures from fumaroles of the Tolbachik volcano, Kamchatka, Russia. II. A new mineral, natroaphthitalite, and new data on belomarinaite

2020· article· en· W3015565373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nadezhda V. Shchipalkina, Igor V. Pekov, Н. В. Чуканов, Dmitry I. Belakovskiy, Natalia V. Zubkova, Natalia N. Koshlyakova, Sergey N. Britvin, Evgeny G. Sidorov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrystallographyMineralFumaroleCrystal (programming language)VolcanoChemistryHematiteAnhydriteElectron microprobeMineralogyGeologyMaterials scienceGeochemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Natroaphthitalite K(Na,K)2Na(SO4)2, a new aphthitalite-group mineral, was found in exhalations of the active Arsenatnaya fumarole at the Second scoria cone of the Northern Breakthrough of the Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption, Tolbachik volcano, Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia. The associated minerals are anhydrite, langbeinite, hematite, tenorite, sanidine, johillerite, tilasite, and belomarinaite. Natroaphthitalite occurs as translucent yellow to colorless roundish single-crystal individuals up to 1 cm in diameter, sometimes combined in crusts up to 2 cm across, and as aqua-transparent colorless tabular to lamellar hexagonal crystals up to 2 mm across, sometimes skeletal, typically combined in parallel intergrowths or brush-like aggregates. Dcalc is 2.664 g/cm3. Natroaphthitalite is optically uniaxial (+), ω = 1.488(2), ε = 1.490(2). The chemical composition (wt.%, electron microprobe) is: Na2O 22.54, K2O 26.39, SO3 51.78, total 100.71. The empirical formula calculated based on 8 O apfu is K1.735Na2.252S2.002O8 (average of 15 spot analyses). The crystal structures of natroaphthitalite and the associated aphthitalite-group mineral belomarinaite, ideally KNaSO4, from the Arsenatnaya fumarole were solved using single-crystal X-ray diffraction and refined to R1 = 0.0283 and 0.0261, respectively. The unit-cell parameters, Z, and space groups are a = 5.6014(3), c = 7.1507(5) Å, V = 194.30(2) Å3, Z = 1, and for natroaphthitalite and a = 5.6088(3), c = 7.1858(4) Å, V = 195.77(1) Å3, Z = 2, and P3m1 for belomarinaite. The crystal chemical formulae of natroaphthitalite and belomarinaite (Z = 1) are XK1.00Y(Na1.28K0.72)Σ2.00MNa1.00(TSO4)2 and XK1.00Y1(Na0.96K0.04)Σ1.00Y2(K0.94Na0.06)Σ1.00MNa1.00(TSO4)2, respectively. Natroaphthitalite is isostructural with aphthitalite K3Na(SO4)2 = XKYK2MNa(TSO4)2 (both have centrosymmetric structures) with prevailing Na over K at the Y site of the crystal structure. Belomarinaite XKY2KY1NaMNa(TSO4)2 is the fully cation-ordered species, with acentric structure, in the series of natural aphthitalite-like K-Na sulfates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207