Liudongshengite, Zn4Cr2(OH)12(CO3)·3H2O, a new mineral of the hydrotalcite supergroup, from the 79 mine, Gila County, Arizona, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A new mineral species, liudongshengite, ideally Zn4Cr2(OH)12(CO3)·3H2O, has been found in the 79 mine, Gila County, Arizona, USA. It occurs as micaceous aggregates or hexagonal platy crystals (up to 0.10 × 0.10 × 0.01 mm). The mineral is pinkish and transparent with white streak and vitreous luster. It is brittle and has a Mohs hardness of ∼1.5, with perfect cleavage on (001). No twinning or parting is observed macroscopically. The measured and calculated densities are 2.95 (3) and 3.00 g/cm3, respectively. Optically, liudongshengite is uniaxial (−), with ω = 1.720 (8), ε = 1.660 (7) (white light). An electron microprobe analysis, combined with the carbon content measured using an elemental combustion system equipped with mass spectrometry, yielded the empirical formula (Zn3.25Mg0.17Cr2.58)Σ6.00(OH)12(CO3)1.29·3H2O, based on (M2+ + M3+) = 6 apfu, where M2+ and M3+ are divalent and trivalent cations, respectively. Liudongshengite belongs to the quintinite group within the hydrotalcite supergroup and is the Cr-analogue of zaccagnaite-3R, Zn4Al2(OH)12(CO3)·3H2O. It is trigonal, with space group Rm and unit-cell parameters a = 3.1111(4), c = 22.682(3) Å, and V = 190.12(4) Å3. The crystal structure of liudongshengite is composed of positively charged brucite-like layers, [M2+1–xM3+x(OH)2]x+, alternating with negatively charged layers of (CO3)2–·3H2O. Compared to other minerals in the quintinite group, liudongshengite is remarkably enriched in M3+, with an M2+:M3+ ratio of 1.33:1. Like zaccagnaite-3R and many other hydrotalcite-type minerals, liudongshengite may also possess polytypes, as a series of synthetic hydrotalcite-type compounds with a general chemical formula [Zn4Cr2(OH)12]X2·4H2O, where X = Cl–, NO3–, or ½ SO42–, but with unit-cell parameters different from those for liudongshengite, have been reported previously.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".