MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980222002 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0056

Numerical investigation of the geomechanical response of adjacent backfilled stopes

2015· article· en· W1980222002 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Nooshin Falaknaz, Michel Aubertin, Li Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringRock mass classificationExcavationGeologyStiffnessStress (linguistics)PillarComputer simulationMining engineeringEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Backfilling of mine stopes helps provide a safe workplace underground. The interaction between the backfill and surrounding rock mass has to be evaluated to ensure the secure application of backfill. This critical issue has led to much research on the stress state in single (isolated) backfilled stopes. However, the stress distribution in multiple openings that interact with each other has not yet been investigated as thoroughly. In this paper, the authors are using numerical simulations to evaluate the response of two adjacent backfilled stopes created in sequence, with a new assumption that is based on an explicit relationship between Poisson’s ratio and the internal friction angle of the backfill; as shown here, the use of this relationship can significantly modify the stress state in backfilled stopes. The simulation results, presented in terms of stresses, displacements, and strains, illustrate the influence of different parameters including backfill strength, pillar width, stope depth, rock mass stiffness, natural stress state, and excavation and filling sequence. Complementary aspects are also considered. A discussion follows on some of the characteristics and limitations of this investigation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207