MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Underground long-term mine production scheduling with integrated geological risk management

2015· article· en· W1957557923 on OpenAlexafffund
Sabrina Carpentier, Michel Gamache, Roussos Dimitrakopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section A · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisPolytechnique MontréalMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Production scheduleScheduleStochastic programmingInteger programmingComputer scienceMillTerm (time)Production (economics)Mathematical optimizationOperations researchEngineeringAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A stochastic integer programming (SIP) model is presented to optimise long-term scheduling of underground mine operations while considering geological uncertainty. To integrate this uncertainty, a set of stochastic simulations is generated, corresponding to representations of the deposit, and is used as primary inputs to optimisation. The two-stage SIP model developed considers a variable cut-off grade and accounts for maximum development, material handling flow conservation, mill and mine capacity, and activity precedencies for an underground nickel mine. The results show that the schedule generated has a higher expected value when considering and managing grade risk. They also demonstrate the benefits of risk control, which this approach allows.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations43
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section ASame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207