Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 105469 |
| Journal | LITHOS |
| Volume | 362-363 |
| Early online date | 10 Mar 2020 |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2020 |
Abstract
We present a new method for calculating amphibole formula from routine electron microprobe analysis (EMPA) data by applying a principal components regression (PCR)-based machine learning algorithm on reference amphibole data. The reference amphibole data collected from literature are grouped in two datasets, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, which include Fe2+, Fe3+, OH contents and the ion site assignments determined by single crystal structure refinement. We established two PCR models, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, by the 10-fold cross validation of training datasets and evaluated by independent test datasets. The results show that our models can successfully reproduce the reference data for most ions with an error less than ±0.01 atom per formula unit (apfu), for Fe3+ within an error less than ±0.2 apfu and for WOH and WO2− with errors less than ±0.3 apfu. The error in estimated Fe3+/ΣFe ratio shows a rough negative dependence on FeOT content (total iron expressed as FeO), ranging within ±0.3 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 5 wt% and within ±0.2 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 10 wt%. Our models are applicable to both W(OH, F, Cl)-dominant and WO-dominant amphiboles. It is notable that this method is not suitable for calculating mineral formula of amphiboles that have been affected by deprotonation as a result of secondary oxidation, but it could offer an estimation of initial WOH prior to the post-formation oxidation. A user-friendly Excel worksheet is provided with two independent PCR models for calculating the formula of Li-free amphibole and Li-bearing amphibole, respectively. An automatic nomenclature function is also provided according to the nomenclature criteria of the 2012 International Mineralogical Association (IMA) report.
Keywords
- Amphibole formula, Amphibole nomenclature, Electron microprobe analysis, Machine learning, Principal components regression
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Geology
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Geochemistry and Petrology
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: LITHOS, Vol. 362-363, 105469, 06.2020.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Calculating amphibole formula from electron microprobe analysis data using a machine learning method based on principal components regression
AU - Li, Xiaoyan
AU - Zhang, Chao
AU - Behrens, Harald
AU - Holtz, Francois
N1 - Funding Information: This study was supported by German Research Foundation (DFG) (BE 1720/40) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (41902052). We thank He Huang and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful comments and Michael Roden for efficient editorial handling. The Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for calculating amphibole formula from EMPA data is provided as supplementary file online.
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - We present a new method for calculating amphibole formula from routine electron microprobe analysis (EMPA) data by applying a principal components regression (PCR)-based machine learning algorithm on reference amphibole data. The reference amphibole data collected from literature are grouped in two datasets, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, which include Fe2+, Fe3+, OH contents and the ion site assignments determined by single crystal structure refinement. We established two PCR models, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, by the 10-fold cross validation of training datasets and evaluated by independent test datasets. The results show that our models can successfully reproduce the reference data for most ions with an error less than ±0.01 atom per formula unit (apfu), for Fe3+ within an error less than ±0.2 apfu and for WOH and WO2− with errors less than ±0.3 apfu. The error in estimated Fe3+/ΣFe ratio shows a rough negative dependence on FeOT content (total iron expressed as FeO), ranging within ±0.3 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 5 wt% and within ±0.2 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 10 wt%. Our models are applicable to both W(OH, F, Cl)-dominant and WO-dominant amphiboles. It is notable that this method is not suitable for calculating mineral formula of amphiboles that have been affected by deprotonation as a result of secondary oxidation, but it could offer an estimation of initial WOH prior to the post-formation oxidation. A user-friendly Excel worksheet is provided with two independent PCR models for calculating the formula of Li-free amphibole and Li-bearing amphibole, respectively. An automatic nomenclature function is also provided according to the nomenclature criteria of the 2012 International Mineralogical Association (IMA) report.
AB - We present a new method for calculating amphibole formula from routine electron microprobe analysis (EMPA) data by applying a principal components regression (PCR)-based machine learning algorithm on reference amphibole data. The reference amphibole data collected from literature are grouped in two datasets, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, which include Fe2+, Fe3+, OH contents and the ion site assignments determined by single crystal structure refinement. We established two PCR models, for Li-free and Li-bearing amphiboles respectively, by the 10-fold cross validation of training datasets and evaluated by independent test datasets. The results show that our models can successfully reproduce the reference data for most ions with an error less than ±0.01 atom per formula unit (apfu), for Fe3+ within an error less than ±0.2 apfu and for WOH and WO2− with errors less than ±0.3 apfu. The error in estimated Fe3+/ΣFe ratio shows a rough negative dependence on FeOT content (total iron expressed as FeO), ranging within ±0.3 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 5 wt% and within ±0.2 for amphiboles with FeOT ≥ 10 wt%. Our models are applicable to both W(OH, F, Cl)-dominant and WO-dominant amphiboles. It is notable that this method is not suitable for calculating mineral formula of amphiboles that have been affected by deprotonation as a result of secondary oxidation, but it could offer an estimation of initial WOH prior to the post-formation oxidation. A user-friendly Excel worksheet is provided with two independent PCR models for calculating the formula of Li-free amphibole and Li-bearing amphibole, respectively. An automatic nomenclature function is also provided according to the nomenclature criteria of the 2012 International Mineralogical Association (IMA) report.
KW - Amphibole formula
KW - Amphibole nomenclature
KW - Electron microprobe analysis
KW - Machine learning
KW - Principal components regression
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081245898&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105469
DO - 10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105469
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85081245898
VL - 362-363
JO - LITHOS
JF - LITHOS
SN - 0024-4937
M1 - 105469
ER -