MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162483216 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-60

Bubbles and element clusters in rock melts: A chicken and egg problem

2021· article· en· W3162483216 on OpenAlexaff
Renelle Dubosq, Pia Pleše, Brian Langelier, Baptiste Gault, David Schneider

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleationCrystallizationMagmaBubbleChemical physicsLiquid bubbleSupersaturationHomogeneousMineralogyChemistryMaterials scienceCrystallographyVolcanoGeologyThermodynamicsMechanicsPhysicsGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The nucleation and growth dynamics of gas bubbles and crystals play a vital function in determining the eruptive behaviour of a magma. Their rate and relative timing, among other factors, are controlled by the magma’s ascent rate. Investigating the kinetics of decompression-induced degassing and crystallization processes can thus give us insight into the rheology of magmas. For example, the rapid decompression of magmas inhibits microlite crystallization and bubble nucleation during ascent leading to crystallization and degassing at shallow levels. This results in a drastic increase in viscosity and an over pressured system, which can lead to violent eruptions. Although many experiments and numerical simulations of magma decompression have been carried out, nascent and initial bubble nucleation remain poorly understood. It is widely accepted that there are two ways bubbles can nucleate within a melt: heterogeneous (on a pre-existing surface) and homogeneous nucleation (within the melt), where homogeneous nucleation requires a higher volatile supersaturation. It has since been tentatively suggested that homogeneous nucleation is simply a variety of heterogeneous nucleation where nucleation occurs on the surface of submicroscopic crystals. However, evidence of these crystals is equivocal. Thus, we have combined novel 2D and 3D structural and chemical microscopy techniques including scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM), electron energy-loss spectroscopy (EELS) mapping, and atom probe tomography (APT) to investigate the presence of sub-nanometer scale chemical heterogeneities in the vicinity of gas bubbles within an experimental andesitic melt. The combined STEM and EELS data reveal a heterogeneous distribution of bubbles within the melt ranging between 20-100 nm in diameter, some of which have Fe and/or Ca element clusters at the bubble-melt interface. Element clusters enriched in Fe, Ca, and Na are also observed heterogeneously distributed within the melt. The reconstructed APT data reveals bubbles as low ionic density regions overlain by a Na-, Ca-, and K-rich cluster and heterogeneously distributed Fe clusters within the bulk of the melt. Based on these observations, our data demonstrate the existence of nano-scale chemical heterogeneities within the melt and at the bubble-melt interface of bubbles that were previously interpreted to be nucleated homogeneously within the melt, therefore contributing to the proposed hypothesis that homogeneous nucleation could in fact be a variety of heterogeneous nucleation. These results highlight the need to redefine homogeneous nucleation and revisit whether bubbles or crystals occur first within volcanic melts. </p>

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207