MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318815322 · doi:10.2138/am-2022-8791

Analyses under the curve, identifying how invisible gold is held in pyrite

2023· article· en· W4318815322 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel D. Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Mineralogist · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPyriteLaser ablationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MineralogyChemistryTransmission electron microscopyGeologyMaterials scienceLaserNanotechnologyOpticsEnvironmental chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) analyses of pyrite plot below the gold solubility line on a gold vs. arsenic plot and have relatively flat counts on laser ablation time-resolved output graphs, it is often interpreted that the gold is held within the pyrite structure. The study by Ehrig et al. (2023, this issue) shows, using a combination of LA-ICP-MS spot analyses of gold in pyrite, transmission electron microscopy, and electron backscatter diffraction that this is not necessarily the case. Furthermore, they use these same techniques to identify how trace elements, including gold, are remobilized in pyrite during deformation and metamorphism.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican MineralogistSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207