MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391601040 · doi:10.1134/s1075701523070073

Garmite, CsLiMg2(Si4O10)F2, a New Mica-Group Mineral from “Quartz Blocks” of the Darai-Pioz Alkaline Massif, Tajikistan

2023· article· en· W4391601040 on OpenAlexaff
Leonid A. Pautov, Atali A. Agakhanov, Igor V. Pekov, Vladimir Yu. Karpenko, Oleg I. Siidra, E. V. Sokolova, F. C. Hawthorne, A. R. Fayziev

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology of Ore Deposits · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassifGeologyMicaGeochemistryQuartzMineralGroup (periodic table)MineralogyMineral resource classificationChemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new trioctahedral mica garmite, CsLiMg2(Si4O10)F2, a Cs analogue of tainiolite, was found in an substantially quartz rock in the Darai-Pioz alkaline massif, Rasht district (formerly Garm district), Central Tajikistan, and was named after the town Garm, an administrative center of the Rasht district. It is closely associated with Mn-bearing pectolite, aegirine, Sr-rich fluorite, quartz, datolite, and polylithionite. Garmite forms lamellae up to 0.2 mm across and up to 0.02 mm thick. The mineral is transparent, colorless, with perfect, mica-like cleavage on (001). The Moh’s hardness is 2.5; micro-indentation hardness VHN20 = 90 kg/mm2. Dmeas = 3.34(2) and Dcalc = 3.336 g/cm3. Garmite is optically biaxial (–), 2Vmeas = –10(5)°, α = 1.582(2), β = 1.601(2), γ = 1.602(2). The chemical composition (electron microprobe, Li and H by SIMS, wt %): SiO2 47.39, Al2O3 0.71, TiO2 0.71, Nb2O5 0.12, FeO 2.12, MnO 0.85, MgO 9.01, ZnO 2.23, K2O 0.16, Cs2O 26.98, Li2O 3.57, H2O 0.08, F 7.23, –O=F2 3.04, total 99.90. The empirical formula calculated on the basis of 12 (O + F) apfu is (Cs0.95K0.02)Σ0.97Li1.21(Mg1.37Zn0.16Fe0.15Al0.07Mn0.06Ti0.04)Σ1.85Si3.99O10.04(F1.92OH0.04)Σ1.96. Garmite is monoclinic, space group C2/m, C2 or Cm; polytype 1M. The unit-cell parameters are a = 5.234(2), b = 9.042(4), c = 10.780(4) Å, β = 99.73(4)°; V = 502.8(6) Å3; Z = 2. The strongest reflections of the powder X‑ray diffraction pattern (d Å, I, hkl) are 4.48, 35, 110; 3.70, 70, –112; 3.45, 44, 022; 2.608, 70, –201, 130; 2.580, 100, 200, –131; 2.241, 45, 220; 2.187, 80, –133. The holotype specimen is deposited in the Fersman Mineralogical Museum, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow catalogue no. 95894.

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 score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 venueGeology of Ore DepositsSame topicCrystal Structures and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207