MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051902589 · doi:10.1179/174328608x362668

Decline design in underground mines using constrained path optimisation

2008· article· en· W2051902589 on OpenAlex
Marcus Brazil, Peter Grossman, D. H. Lee, J Rubinstein, D. A. Thomas, N. C. Wormald

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

VenueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section A · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of Melbourne
KeywordsHaulageTruckPath (computing)Underground mining (soft rock)Key (lock)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationEngineeringIndustrial engineeringOperations researchAlgorithmCoal miningMathematicsAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the problem of optimising the design of an underground mine decline, so as to minimise the costs associated with infrastructure development and haulage over the lifetime of the mine. A key design consideration is that the decline must be navigable by trucks and mining equipment, hence must satisfy both gradient and turning circle constraints. The decline is modelled as a mathematical network that captures the operational constraints and costs of a real mine, and is optimised using geometric techniques for constrained path optimisation. A deep understanding of the geometric properties of gradient and turning circle constrained paths has led to a very efficient procedure for designing optimal declines. This procedure has been automated in a new version of a software tool, decline optimisation tool. A case study is described indicating the substantial improvements of the new version of the decline optimisation tool over the earlier one.

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)0.000
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 score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.191 · 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