MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Where do the data come from?

2012· article· en· W2110046526 on OpenAlexaff
John Hadjigeorgiou

Bibliographic record

VenueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section A · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMargin (machine learning)Computer scienceQuality (philosophy)Data qualityData collectionRisk analysis (engineering)Data scienceMining engineeringConstruction engineeringEngineeringOperations managementBusinessMachine learningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep and high stress mining poses a significant number of geotechnical challenges. Despite considerable improvements in almost every technological aspect of the design and operation of mines at depth and under high stress, the weakest link remains the quality and quantity of data. This paper addresses certain inconvenient facts on how data are collected and managed. The case is made for a disciplined approach to data collection, analysis and interpretation. Unless this is implemented in a systematic way, it will not be possible to capitalise in gains made from improved engineering tools. A further concern is that for mines operating at depth, the margin of error due to inadequate or inappropriate data is much smaller, and the repercussions more severe, compared to shallow mines.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.244
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.244
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.016
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0280.036
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.040

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section ASame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207