Quantifying the intensity of crystallographic preferred orientation (CPO): some practical considerations and recommended practices

Crystallographic preferred orientations (CPOs) commonly develop during the crystal-plastic deformation of rocks and minerals and are widely used to infer strain intensity and geometry, reconstruct deformation conditions, and estimate mechanical anisotropy. Numerous methods have been proposed to quantify CPO intensity as a scalar metric, but these metrics can be highly sensitive to their calculation parameters and input data quality. Here, we examine the performance of two widely used metrics—the J-index and the M-index—using orientation data from electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) for a diverse suite of simulated, natural, and experimental specimens. We show that ODF-based measures of CPO intensity, such as the J-index, can vary markedly with kernel parameters and may fail to converge to a unique value. In contrast, the M-index, when calculated from random-pair misorientation angle histograms, yields stable, reproducible results across a broad range of conditions. Monte Carlo resampling demonstrates that M can be accurately described with 95% probability using ~500 orientations for moderate-to-strong CPOs (M ≥ 0.25), whereas weak CPOs (M < 0.1) may require up to ~3,000 unique orientation measurements. These findings form the basis of a recommended, standardised practice to ensure that CPO intensity values are both reproducible and comparable across similar geological and experimental contexts.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-08-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31223/x55m9k
Primary Topic
Crystallization and Solubility Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantifying the intensity of crystallographic preferred orientation (CPO): some practical considerations and recommended practices

Andrew Cross
5 links
Crystallization and Solubility Studies
article

Quantifying the intensity of crystallographic preferred orientation (CPO): some practical considerations and recommended practices

Andrew Cross
article en

Abstract

Crystallographic preferred orientations (CPOs) commonly develop during the crystal-plastic deformation of rocks and minerals and are widely used to infer strain intensity and geometry, reconstruct deformation conditions, and estimate mechanical anisotropy. Numerous methods have been proposed to quantify CPO intensity as a scalar metric, but these metrics can be highly sensitive to their calculation parameters and input data quality. Here, we examine the performance of two widely used metrics—the J-index and the M-index—using orientation data from electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) for a diverse suite of simulated, natural, and experimental specimens. We show that ODF-based measures of CPO intensity, such as the J-index, can vary markedly with kernel parameters and may fail to converge to a unique value. In contrast, the M-index, when calculated from random-pair misorientation angle histograms, yields stable, reproducible results across a broad range of conditions. Monte Carlo resampling demonstrates that M can be accurately described with 95% probability using ~500 orientations for moderate-to-strong CPOs (M ≥ 0.25), whereas weak CPOs (M < 0.1) may require up to ~3,000 unique orientation measurements. These findings form the basis of a recommended, standardised practice to ensure that CPO intensity values are both reproducible and comparable across similar geological and experimental contexts.

National Science Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Crystallization and Solubility Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.