MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Solving a large SIP model for production scheduling at a gold mine with multiple processing streams and uncertain geology

2015· article· en· W2144642841 on OpenAlexaff
M. de Freitas Silva, Roussos Dimitrakopoulos, Amina Lamghari

Bibliographic record

VenueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section A · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSTREAMSScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceProduction (economics)GeologyEngineeringComputer networkOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an efficient heuristic solution approach is applied and tested to the stochastic mine production scheduling of a relatively large gold deposit containing about 120 thousand blocks and considering a set of 15 geological scenarios generated stochastically. The case study addresses multiple processing streams and a ‘grade’ stockpile, which adds flexibility to the specific operation by advancing the processing of highly valuable material. The solution approach first generates an initial feasible solution by sequentially solving the stochastic open-pit mine production scheduling (OPMPS) period by period, and then a network-flow algorithm is used to sequentially search for improvements. In this network graph, the nodes identify candidate blocks that might have their extraction postponed or advanced, aiming for new schedules with higher value and lower risks. The results show that production schedules with low deviations from production expectations can be generated in a reasonable time for an actual mining environment.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMining Technology Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy Section ASame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207