Order-disorder, polytypes and twinning in the crystal structure of vurroite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to twinning by merohedry the reciprocal lattices of the different domains of non-merohedral twins do not overlap exactly.If both twin domains are similar in size, there are often problems with the cell determinations and usual automatic indexing programs fail.But nowadays there are several programs that can deal with such kinds of problems [1], [2], [3].In principle two different integration procedures are possible.The simpler one would be to integrate with all orientation matrices separately in different runs.This leads to three kinds of reflections: the reflections with no overlap, the reflections with an exact overlap, and the reflection with a partial overlap of a reflection of a second domain.A better way of integration is to use all orientation matrices in one step.Then the whole intensity of every reflection is integrated and we only have non-or exactly overlapped reflections [4], [5].A special program for scaling and absorption correction is necessary to handle such data sets [6].Refinements with data sets generated by different integration processes will be compared [7].
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".