Ezochiite and shiranuiite are cuprorhodsite and are not new mineral species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ezochiite was described as a newly discovered platinum-group mineral in the thiospinel group having an ideal formula of Cu+(Rh3+Pt4+)S4 (Nishio-Hamane and Saito 2024), but the data presented show it is a platinian cuprorhodsite, Cu(Rh,Pt)2S4 (Cabri et al. 2023; Rudashevsky et al. 1985). Similarly, Nishio-Hamane et al. (2024) describe shiranuiite as a new mineral having an ideal formula of Cu+(Rh3+Rh4+)S4 on the basis of assumed valences. Thus, instead of weighing the significance of chemical substitution in a PGE-dominant thiospinel, the readership is instead burdened with accepting that there are three potential minerals with virtually identical crystal structures and similar, but supposedly distinct, chemical compositions. In the absence of any new, compelling data, particularly regarding the valences of the ions present in both ezochiite and shiranuiite, it is argued that both are not new mineral species but instead represent varieties of cuprorhodsite.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".