MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011127227 · doi:10.1134/s1062739147030117

Mixed integer linear programming formulations for open pit production scheduling

2011· article· en· W2011127227 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mining Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteger programmingMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)Linear programmingComputer scienceBinary numberBlock (permutation group theory)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the main obstacles in using mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulations for large-scale open pit production scheduling is the size of the problem. The objective of this work is to develop, implement, and verify deterministic MILP formulations for long-term large-scale open pit production scheduling problems. The objective of the model is to maximize the net present value, while meeting grade blending, mining and processing capacities, and the precedence of block extraction constraints. We present four MILP formulations; the first two models are modifications of available models; we also propose, test and validate two new MILP formulations. To reduce the number of binary integer variables in the formulation, we aggregate blocks into larger units referred to as mining-cuts. We compare the performances of the proposed models based on net present value generated, practical mining production constraints, size of the mathematical programming formulations, the number of integer variables required in formulation, and the computational time required for convergence. An iron ore mine case study is represented to illustrate the practicality of the models as well.

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)0.002
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 score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.188 · 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