MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386711136 · doi:10.3749/2300021

Discreditation of <i>Platarsite</i>: A S-Rich Variety of Sperrylite

2023· article· en· W4386711136 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew M. McDonald, Louis J. Cabri

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Mineralogy and Petrology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsostructuralCrystallographyPlatinum groupMineralCrystal structureChemistryPyritePlatinumGeologyMineralogyCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Platarsite is a relatively uncommon platinum-group mineral, reported from several world-wide localities, that has been defined as both Pt(As,S)2 and PtAsS in the literature. It was first described using material from the Onverwacht mine, eastern Bushveld Complex, Republic of South Africa, where it occurs with genkinite, geversite, and Pt-Fe alloy. Data from chemical analyses indicate (1) Pt is the dominant PGE, but with significant enrichments of both Rh and Ru; (2) ΣAs+S ∼ 2; (3) ΣPGE:ΣAs+S ∼ 1:2; and (4) As:S ratios of ∼1 (but with most data showing As &amp;gt; S), all of which suggest either PtAsS or Pt(As,S)2 as ideal compositions. Results from crystal-structure analyses conducted on both platarsite and sperrylite (Szymański 1979) demonstrate that the two are isostructural, both crystallizing in the cubic space group Pa3, with refined unit-cell edges of 5.788(1) and 5.9681(1) Å, respectively. They possess a pyrite-like crystal structure that includes a single metal site and a single anion site. The latter indicates that As and S, even if present in ratios of ∼1, must be disordered over a single site, rather than occupying two separate crystallographic sites. A re-evaluation of the available chemical data, along with the results from crystal-structure analyses, indicate that platarsite is a S-enriched variety of sperrylite and, as such, it has been discredited as a valid mineral species.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Mineralogy and PetrologySame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207