MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128225912 · doi:10.1134/s1075701520080073

Mineral Systems Based on the Number of Species-Defining Chemical Elements in Minerals: Their Diversity, Complexity, Distribution, and the Mineral Evolution of the Earth’s Crust: A Review

2020· review· en· W3128225912 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
В. Г. Кривовичев, M. V. Charykova, Sergey V. Krivovichev

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology of Ore Deposits · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMineralGeologyGeochemistryMineralogyMeteoriteHadeanMineral resource classificationEarth scienceChemistryCrustAstrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—The chemical diversity of minerals can be analyzed in terms of the concept of mineral systems based on the set of chemical elements that are essential for defining a mineral species. Only species-defining elements are considered to be essential. According to this approach, all minerals are classified into ten types of mineral systems with the number of essential components ranging from 1 to 10. For all known minerals, only 70 chemical elements act as essential species-defining constituents. Using this concept of mineral systems, various geological objects may be compared from the viewpoint of their mineral diversity: for example, alkali massifs (Khibiny and Lovozero in Russia; Mont Saint Hilaire in Canada), evaporite deposits (Inder in Kazakhstan and Searles Lake in the United States), fumaroles of active volcanoes (Tolbachik in Kamchatka and Vulcano in Sicily, Italy), and hydrothermal deposits (Otto Mountain in the United States and El Dragon in Bolivia). Correlations between chemical and structural complexities of the minerals were analyzed using a total of 5240 datasets on their chemical compositions and 3989 datasets on their crystal structures. The statistical analysis yields strong and positive correlations (R2 > 0.95) between chemical and structural complexities and the number of different chemical elements in a mineral. The analysis of relationships between chemical and structural complexities provides strong evidence for the overall trend of a greater structural complexity at a higher chemical complexity. Following R. Hazen, four groups of minerals representing four mineral evolution stages have been considered: (I) “Ur-minerals,” (II) minerals from chondrite meteorites, (III) Hadean minerals, and (IV) contemporary minerals. According to the obtained data, the number of species-defining elements in minerals and their average contents increase regularly and significantly from stage I to stage IV. The analyzed average chemical and structural complexities in these four groups demonstrate that both are gradually increasing in the course of mineral evolution. The increasing complexity follows an overall trend: the more complex minerals were formed in the course of geological time, without replacing the simpler ones. The observed correlations between chemical and structural complexities understood in terms of the Shannon information suggest that chemical differentiation is the major force that drives the increase of mineral complexity over the course of geological time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeology of Ore DepositsSame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207