MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220772585 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2021-0086

Neoformation of palygorskite in Calcids of Central Iran

2022· article· en· W4220772585 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peyman Amin, Mohammad Akhavan Ghalibaf

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicClay minerals and soil interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalygorskiteAuthigenicClay mineralsGeologyAlluviumCalciteMineralogySoil waterHorizonGeochemistrySedimentary rockSoil scienceGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Palygorskite has been reported in alluvial sediments and in soil clays in Central Iran, but it is not known if it is inherited or formed in situ. Here, we sampled Calcids developed from Triassic and Cambrian dolomitic formations in the southwestern part of Yazd and performed soil and clay characterization by X-ray diffraction and fluorescence, optical and scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer analyses. Our results suggested palygorskite neoformation in the calcic soil horizons in Calcids. The soils with aridic soil moisture regime and high Mg concentration, during the formation of a calcic horizon by precipitation of secondary calcite, conditions were suitable for authigenic palygorskite crystals of long size (>10–20 μm) and their stability. In addition, the occurrence of short-size (about 2 μm) palygorskite fibers in the lower gypsic horizon probably resulted from its translocation from the upper horizons. Therefore, such results suggested palygorskite neoformation in the calcic soil horizons in these Calcids of Iran.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicClay minerals and soil interactionsFrench-language works237,207