Sphalerite Flotation Using an Arylhydroxamic Acid Collector: Improving Grade while Using a Reduced Amount of Copper Sulfate for Activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
N -Hydrocinnamoyl- N -phenylhydroxylamine (HCNPHA) was determined to float sphalerite without copper sulfate activation. However, the concomitant flotation of sulfidic (pyrite) and nonsulfidic gangue (silica) minerals significantly reduced the grade of the float concentrate. The addition of only 200 g/t copper sulfate, which is ∼20% of that which is being used currently in the xanthate reagent scheme, improved the grade and the recovery. Seven different types of carboxymethylcellulose (CMC-1−CMC-7) were tested. CMC-1 was found to be the best as a depressant of gangue flotation. Copper sulfate appeared to differentiate the sphalerite surface well and facilitated chelation while the CMC changed the frothing characteristics of the slurry and prevented entrainment of gangue into float concentrate (froth). Studies on flotation kinetics also confirmed the improved selectivity attained by using copper sulfate and a CMC. The selectivity index (SI) for sphalerite, with respect to pyrite, improved from 0.88 to 2.35 when copper sulfate was added, and that for nonsulfidic gangue increased from 1.93 to 6.29 when CMC was added.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".