Canadian Mineralogist Vol. 23, pp."149-162 (1985) CHARACTERISTIC OPTICAL DATA FOR COOPERITE, BRAGGITE AND VYSOTSKITE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRAcT Reflectance spectra for cooperite PtS and braggite (Pt,Pd)S from the type locality at Potgietersrus, South Africa, were measured between 2100 and 700 nm. These spec-tra, and qualitative descriptions of the grains, complete the characterization of the minerals made in 1932 by Bamister & Hey. The mineral association, optical properties and reflectance spectra of cooperite, braggite and vysotskite PdS from the Minneapolis Adit area of the Stillwater complex, Montana, are also described. The data for cooperite and braggite are compared with those for the type material; the data for vysotskite may, in the absence of appropriate data for the type material from Noril'sk, U.S.S.R., be consi-dered characteristic for the mineral. Electron-microprobe data are provided for all ofthe grains measured inthe reflec-tance study, and VHN for most of them. The extraordi-nary confusion that has surrounded the quantitative data and qualitative descriptions of these minerals is described. Reflectance spectra and color values demonstrate the false-hood of the long-standing belief that cooperite resembles pyrrhotine. The original descriptions (Schneiderhcihn l929a,b) were not of cooperite but probably of the then. unknown mineral braggite. This error was compounded when the reflectance 'spectrum ' of pyrrhotine, from the supposedly cooperite-bearing concentrates, was mistaken for that of cooperite.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.230 | 0.117 |
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".