MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170106502 · doi:10.5539/jmsr.v5n1p54

A Study of Technical Measures for Increasing the Roof-Contacted Ratio in Stope and Cavity Filling

2015· article· en· W2170106502 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kouame Joseph Arthur Kouame, Yujun Feng, Fuxing Jiang, Sitao Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Science Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlurryRoofMaterials scienceMining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the increasing depth of mines, fill mining is increasingly widely used in metal mines. As a result, supporting pit roofs has become an important issue to which an increasing number of people are devoting attention. This paper analyses the factors affecting the rate of supporting pit roofs under stope filling conditions, including filling slurry properties and the filling process. Building on this, the paper examines a number of potential measures for improving the rate of supporting pit roofs, including creating good conditions for filling, optimizing filling slurry properties, eliminating the problems caused by water and improving filling technology. Mining companies must select from these measures according to the particular conditions in which their mines operate, but given the right conditions all of the measures examined have the potential to increase the rate at which pit roofs are supported.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Science ResearchSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207