Identification of Common Minerals Using Stoichiometric Calibration Method for Dual‐Energy CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Medical X‐ray computed tomography (CT) can be used to rapidly and non‐destructively characterize structure and density variations of geological specimens. More information about the nature of samples (electron density and elemental composition) can be retrieved using multi‐spectral approaches. This paper explores one of them, a stoichiometric calibration method for dual‐energy imaging, to identify the most common minerals. A set of 18 calibrating materials was selected to cover a range of variability in effective atomic number (Zeff) and electron density (ρe) encountered in geological specimens. The validation of this calibration was performed analyzing 23 common minerals by mapping their respective Zeff and ρe in order to identify the one with the closest properties. This study shows that the stoichiometric method correctly identifies the most important and common minerals (quartz, calcite, dolomite) that are usually not distinguishable using a single energy imaging method, although all the 23 studied minerals were not correctly determined. We show that this method previously elaborated for medical purposes is also efficient in earth science.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".