MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126246442 · doi:10.1180/minmag.2017.081.060

From structure topology to chemical composition. XXIV. Revision of the crystal structure and chemical formula of vigrishinite, NaZnTi<sub>4</sub>(Si<sub>2</sub>O<sub>7</sub>)<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>(OH)(H<sub>2</sub>O)<sub>4</sub>, a seidozerite-supergroup mineral from the Lovozero alkaline massif, Kola peninsula, Russia

2017· article· en· W3126246442 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Sokolova, F. C. Hawthorne

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrystallographyCrystal structureElectron microprobeOctahedronGroup (periodic table)Chemical compositionChemistryStructural formulaMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The crystal structure of vigrishinite, ideally NaZnTi4(Si2O7)2O3(OH)(H2O)4, a murmanite-group mineral of the seidozerite supergroup from the type locality, Mt. Malyi Punkaruaiv, Lovozero alkaline massif, Kola Peninsula, Russia, was refined in space group C $\bar 1$ , a = 10.530(2), b = 13.833(3), c = 11.659(2) Å, α = 94.34(3), β = 98.30(3), γ = 89.80(3)°, V = 1675.5(2.1) Å3 and R1 = 12.52%. Based on electron-microprobe analysis, the empirical formula calculated on 22 (O + F), with two constraints derived from structure refinement, OH + F = 1.96 pfu and H2O = 3.44 pfu, is: (Na0.67Zn0.21Ca0.05□1.07)Σ2 (Zn0.86□1.14)Σ2(Zn0.14□0.36)Σ0.5(Ti2.60Nb0.62Mn0.30 ${\rm Fe}_{{\rm 0}{\rm. 23}}^{{\rm 2 +}} $ Mg0.10Zr0.06Zn0.05Al0.03Ta0.01)Σ4(Si4.02O14) [O2.60(OH)1.21F0.19]Σ4[(H2O)3.44(OH)0.56]Σ4{Zn0.24P0.03K0.03Ba0.02} with Z = 4. It seems unlikely that constituents in the {} belong to vigrishinite itself. The crystal structure of vigrishinite is an array of TS blocks (Titanium Silicate) connected via hydrogen bonds. The TS block consists of HOH sheets (H = heteropolyhedral and O = octahedral) parallel to (001). In the O sheet, the Ti-dominant MO(1,2) sites, Na-dominant MO(3) and □-dominant MO(4) sites give ideally Na□Ti2 pfu. In the H sheet, the Ti-dominant MH(1,2) sites, Zn-dominant AP(1) and vacant AP(2) sites give ideally Zn□Ti2 pfu. The MH and AP(1) polyhedra and Si2O7 groups constitute the H sheet. The ideal structural formula of vigrishinite of the form ${\rm A}_{\rm 2}^{P} {\rm M}_{\rm 2}^{\rm H} {\rm M}_{\rm 4}^{\rm O} $ (Si2O7)2( ${\rm X}_{\rm M}^{\rm O} $ )2( ${\rm X}_{\rm A}^{\rm O} $ )2( ${\rm X}_{{\rm M,A}}^{P} $ )4 is Zn□Ti2Na□Ti2(Si2O7)2O2O(OH)(H2O)4. Vigrishinite is a Zn-bearing, Na-poor and OH-rich analogue of murmanite, ideally Na2Ti2Na2Ti2(Si2O7)2O2O2(H2O)4. Murmanite and vigrishinite are related by the following substitution: H( ${\rm Na}_{\rm 2}^{\rm +} $ )mur + O(Na+)mur + O(O2–)mur ↔ H(Zn2+)vig + H(□)vig + O(□)vig + O[(OH)–]vig. The doubling of the t1 and t2 translations of vigrishinite compared to those of murmanite is due to the order of Zn and □ in the H sheet and Na and □ in the O sheet of vigrishinite.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207