MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969369412 · doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2006.08.006

Analysis of mineral surface chemistry in flotation separation using imaging XPS

2006· article· en· W1969369412 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChalcociteX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyAdsorptionChemistrySelectivityDissolutionChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryChalcopyriteCopperCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Inco Bessemer Matte Processing Plant (IBMPP) suffers a loss of chalcocite selectivity in flotation separation from heazlewoodite down the rougher bank. Energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analyses of the feed, concentrate and tail samples reveal a decrease in Cu and corresponding increase in Ni recovery through the primary rougher banks; tail samples can contain on the order of 7% Cu. The aim of this work was to examine any loss of selectivity through the primary flotation stream due to surface chemistry. Mechanisms suggested have included inadvertent activation and depression by the dissolution and solution transfer of Cu and Ni ions, lack of collector selectivity and possible requirement for reaction of the chalcocite surface prior to collector adsorption. The combination of information from SEM/EDX, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis and XPS imaging has clarified the following aspects of the surface chemical mechanisms and control factors in the rougher flotation separation: (1) chalcocite in the feed to the rougher circuit appears to be unoxidized, i.e., all Cu(I) surface species, whereas the surfaces of the heazlewoodite appear to be entirely oxidized to hydroxide species; (2) chalcocite in the tails from the rougher circuit appears to be more oxidized with evident precipitates corresponding to Cu(OH)2 in both composition and morphology adhering to their surfaces; (3) the primary adsorption of diphenylguanidine (DPG) appears to be to Cu(I) sites on the unoxidized chalcocite surface; (4) adsorption of the DPG collector to chalcocite surfaces appears to be inhibited by the formation or concentration of fine Cu(II) hydroxide precipitates in the later rougher cells; (5) the crystalline morphology of some of the discrete, attached Cu(II) hydroxide precipitates may suggest formation in recycle water streams rather than by surface oxidation of the chalcocite through the circuit although this may not be the only form of Cu(II) hydroxide on chalcocite surfaces in cells C and D; (6) heazlewoodite flotation appears to be associated with the attachment or locking of fine unoxidized chalcocite rather than any direct adsorption of DPG; heazlewoodite fines are also found attached or locked to some chalcocite particles in concentrates contributing to loss of grade (i.e., heazlewoodite is not completely liberated); (7) heazlewoodite particles in tails have relatively high surface concentrations of attached more-oxidized chalcocite fines contributing to loss of recovery.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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