MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W103333007

Use of BGM in the Diavik Diamond Mines Processed Kimberlite Containment Facility

2008· article· en· W103333007 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Terry Eldridge, Jeff Reinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomembraneContainment (computer programming)Environmental scienceGeologyMining engineeringGeotechnical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Diavik Diamond Mine in the Northwest Territories of Canada is located on the East Island of Lac de Gras. Protection of the environment and specially the quality of the water in Lac de Gras is a priority for the mining company. Geomembrane lined dams are used to collect run off from all mining areas or the island. Following removal of the diamonds from the kimberlite the remaining material, the “Processed Kimberlite” is permanently stored in a containment facility constructed with a geomembrane liner in the perimeter dams to minimize seepage. This paper reviews the performance of the bituminous geomembrane (BGM) that was installed in three water management ponds. The PK facility is constructed in stages with the fourth stage being constructed in 2006. In this stage, the design was changed to use a bituminous geomembrane rather than a HDPE geomembrane. Using these recent site construction examples, the weather conditions under which the BGM can be installed, particularly under extremely cold conditions, the changes to the dam section that the change of line type allowed, and areas of cost and schedule savings that the change allowed are identified, and the method used to bond the two geomembrane types are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207