MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122764004 · doi:10.1139/t10-089

Role of fines on cohesive behavior of mine tailings inferred from critical shear stress

2011· article· en· W2122764004 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Africa M. Geremew, Ernest K. Yanful

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTailingsGeotechnical engineeringShear stressGeologyTailings damShear (geology)Stress (linguistics)Materials scienceComposite materialMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The significance of fines on the cohesive behavior of mine tailings has been investigated by examining the incipient motion of the tailings. Sixteen laboratory experiments were performed in a Plexiglas laboratory annular column on re-constituted mine tailings under a 50 cm water cover. Re-suspension was produced by a Teflon stirrer and the velocity field in the column was characterized using a laser Doppler velocimeter (LDV). The pressure change in the boundary layer was also measured with a Preston tube. It was observed that the nondimensional critical shear stresses showed deviation from those of the noncohesive model results at a fines content greater than 50%–55%. An empirical relation that shows the relation between the boundary shear stress deviation and the percent fines in the tailings was proposed. Regression analysis of the experimental results showed that a power law relationship could reasonably be used to describe the relation between the measured nondimensional excess bed shear stress and the erosion rate. It is proposed that the value of β (the erosion rate constant) could be taken as 1 for mine tailings that show cohesive behavior.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207