Chromite cluster formation within the Rum Layered Igneous Complex, NW Scotland: A multi-modal approach.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanism of chromite chain and cluster formation in igneous rocks is a highly debated topic (e.g., with wider relevance due to the tendency for chromite-rich cumulate to host economic concentrations of the critical platinum group metals. Recently, In the same study they showed, using the principles of physics, that the currently popular argument for in-situ nucleation and growth via a process involving 'heterogeneous self-nucleation' for these systems is implausible. Here we present multi-modal analysis (X-ray tomography, energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy, and electron backscatter diffraction) of chromite chains and clusters from Units 7/8 and 10 peridotites, Rum Layered Suite, Scotland. Our data show the individual chromite grains within the clusters and chains exhibit random relationships to one another, in agreement with the results of This suggests either that the Unit 7/8 and 10 peridotite clusters formed by synneusis of rounded grains, or that they accumulated as single grains, forming a framework (chicken-wire texture:
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".