Discreditation of <i>Borishanskiite</i> as a Mineral Species (= Polarite, PdPb)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A re-examination by electron probe microanalysis of the holotype sample of the platinum-group mineral borishanskiite, previously defined as Pd1+x(As,Pb)2 with x = 0–0.2, reveals that the mineral contains no detectable As. The new data also show the mineral to be stoichiometric, i.e., vacancy-free, with the average chemical composition (based on 2 apfu) of Pd0.99(Pb0.72Bi0.28)Σ1.00 (n = 3) or ideally, PdPb. A comparison of the powder X-ray diffraction patterns for borishanskiite (PDF 00-029-0960) and polarite (PDF 00-023; ideally PdPb) show that, within error, the two are same. Further, the refined unit-cell parameters of borishanskiite, a = 7.18(2), b = 8.62(2), c = 10.66(2) Å, agree well with those of polarite, a = 7.140, b = 8.563, c =10.501 Å. Given the new chemical data for borishanskiite, which suggest the ideal chemical formula PdPb, along with its crystallographic similarity to polarite, it is concluded that borishanskiite is equivalent to polarite. Discussion of the extent of the PdBi–PdPb solid-solution series and confusion concerning the ideal formula for polarite is also presented.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".