Staged construction analysis of surface tailings disposal facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One of the major challenges that faces the mining industry is the stability of surface tailings disposal facilities (STDF) particularly when they are raised with the more economical upstream method whereby the embankments are partially built on previously deposited soft tailing materials. Whether the effective or total stress analysis should be used to evaluate the stability of STDFs under construction/operation has been a controversial issue among the respective researchers. Although both analyses cannot compete with the coupled deformation approach, the latter is still grossly underused in the geotechnical evaluation process of STDFs. The goal of this article is to develop a numerical model that can more genuinely assess the stability of STDFs during staged construction using the coupled deformation approach. A number of simulation techniques are presented and discussed using actual data for an upstream coal wash STDF. Keywords: surface tailings disposal facilitiesstabilitycoupled analysisnumerical modelling Acknowledgements The research work is partially supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Canada (NSERC) and McGill University, Canada. The authors are grateful for their generous support.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".