An improved method to assess the required strength of cemented backfill in underground stopes with an open face
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Backfill is increasingly used in underground mines to reduce the surface impact from the wastes produced by the mining operations. But the main objectives of backfilling are to improve ground stability and reduce ore dilution. To this end, the backfill in a stope must possess a minimum strength to remain self-standing during mining of an adjacent stope. This required strength is often estimated using a solution proposed by Mitchell and co-workers, which was based on a limit equilibrium analysis of a wedge exposed by the open face. In this paper, three dimensional numerical simulations have been performed to assess the behavior of the wedge model. A new limit equilibrium solution is proposed, based on the backfill displacements obtained from the simulations. Comparisons are made between the proposed solution and experimental and numerical modeling results. Compared with the previous solution, a better agreement is obtained between the new solution and experimental results for the required cohesion and factor of safety. For large scale (field) conditions, the results also show that the required strength obtained from the proposed solution corresponds quite well to the simulated backfill response.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it