MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimising combined open pit and underground strategic plan

2013· article· en· W1991756499 on OpenAlexaff
B. C. Roberts, T. Elkington, K. Van Olden, M. Maulen

Bibliographic record

VenueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsMinnow Environmental (Canada)
FundersAustralasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
KeywordsStopingPlan (archaeology)Resource (disambiguation)Underground mining (soft rock)Mining engineeringWork (physics)Process (computing)Open-pit miningEngineeringStrategic planningCivil engineeringOperations researchComputer scienceGeologyWaste managementBusinessCoal miningMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the case of a large open pit that is being planned at the site of an existing underground mine. Strategic planning work is undertaken to investigate the project value associated with an expansion of underground operations in conjunction with the proposed pit. Previous analysis by mine planners has determined that any depletion of the available open pit resource that changes the optimum pushback sequence will have a significant negative impact on overall project value. As a result, the main objective of this case study is to determine a strategic plan capable of yielding the optimum economic value for a combined underground–open pit operation.To investigate the viability of an underground expansion, a system to identify the stope resource that would add value to a combined operation if mined ahead of the pit is required. The main solution to this problem is the use of a resource model variable that defines the blocks which have greater discounted value if mined by stoping rather than by the open pit. From this potential underground resource, a series of mineable stope shells are generated at various cut-offs. This stope reserve data formed the input to an optimisation process used to optimise the underground mining plan, at a conceptual level, for various project configurations. Then, a dynamic programming mathematical program is used to evaluate the optimum value of a combined open pit and underground operation. The results generated in the case study presented herein provide a clear focus and direction for the next level of detailed mine design and planning.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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