Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The structure hierarchy hypothesis states that structures may be ordered hierarchically according to the polymerization of coordination polyhedra of higher bond-valence, and such hierarchies are useful in understanding the general compositional, structural, and paragenetic variations within the structural group of interest. Here we develop a structure hierarchy for the aluminofluoride minerals based on the polymerization of the dominant (AlΦ6) octahedra and their linkage with other strongly bonded complex anionic groups. The minerals are divided first into the following categories: (1) simple aluminofluorides and (2) compound aluminofluorides containing other oxyanions. The minerals are then ordered according to the polymerization of the constituent polyhedra into a coherent structural hierarchy. The chemical composition and crystal-chemical details of the ions of the interstitial complex are a collective function of the Lewis acidity of the interstitial cations; the presence of interstitial anions, both simple [F–, (OH)–] and complex [(SO4)2–]; self-polymerization of the (AlF6)3– octahedra; and polymerization with both Mg(F,OH)6 octahedra and other complex anions: (SO4)2–, (PO4)3–, (CO3)2–.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".