MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2201025148

Global Mining at the Edge of Transformation

2015· article· en· W2201025148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Headrick

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch-Technology Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)BoomBustAnalyticsBusinessProductivityInformation technologyCommodityEngineeringIndustrial organizationEconomyEconomicsComputer scienceFinanceEconomic growthData science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early this year, mining giant Rio Tinto opened a new data center in Pune, India, to analyze massive volumes of information gathered from sensors attached to equipment operating at its mines around the world. Rio Tinto's Analytics Excellence Centre was established to predict and prevent downtime and improve safety and productivity. It's an industry first--mining has been pretty much last in adopting such business practices--but it could be the beginning of a sorely needed transformation. The center is unique in applying sophisticated data management technology, but also because it manages multiple, remote operations from a central location--mining has been, traditionally, a local art. If it is successful, the center and other recent innovations like it could help alter the fortunes of an industry in crisis. is a volatile business at any time, subject to boom-or-bust cycles and the vagaries of nature, local politics, and commodity markets. But 2014 was a particularly bad year in a string of them, and 2015 looks bleak as well. Gold prices are at a four-year low. Iron ore plummeted to double-digit territory in May 2015 and is forecast to hit an all-time low of $70 a ton in 2017. The world's biggest steel consumer, China, is pulling back on orders as its economy slows. Many mining companies have canceled projects or folded altogether. In this context, the world's largest mining companies are fighting to survive and stay competitive. Some companies have invested in critical new automation and drilling technology that promises to improve production and reduce costs, but a growing chorus of industry leaders argues that more fundamental change is needed--companies must change from within. Business models and processes must be streamlined to eliminate waste, smooth out the peaks and valleys of production, reduce accidents, protect the environment, and provide flexibility to respond to the unforeseen. The industry's future, these leaders say, depends not so much on where the next big ore deposit is discovered, but on how well mining companies coordinate dynamic information across complex operations. Emilie Ditton, a mining industry consultant and head of Asia Pacific Energy Insights at International Data Corporation (IDC), spends much of her time identifying ways to get operational silos inside mining companies to talk with each other. Mining companies are very sophisticated within their operational silos, she said. They do everything from optimizing truck performance to minimizing fuel costs and conveyor belt material handling efficiency. But if a production operation meets its goals and delivers product to a processing operation that can't handle all of the material coming in, the ultimate production outcomes are not improved. companies have assets, technology, and access to data, Ditton said. What they require is an enterprise-level data Far more than new technology, she said, mines need organizational investment in data interpretation as a business strategy. But, she admits, it takes strong leadership to take a risk on a new idea. We don't yet have a convincing story to tell on why we would take that risk, she said. That might be changing, however. We're in the early stages of a paradigm shift in mining, said Mike MacFarlane, a Canadian engineer and industry consultant, and retired executive vice president of AngloGold Ashanti, one of the world's largest mining companies. There are lots of clues around. Start with technology and innovation. In the United States, the auto industry in the 1940s and '50s had no peers; in the '60s and '70s, no peers. In the '80s, little Japanese cars changed everything. GM went to Japan and copied Toyota's lean manufacturing process. I would say the mining industry, in the little Japanese car analogy, is in the mid-80s. Indeed, the metaphor holds in the particulars, too, as mining companies are beginning to look at lean manufacturing for ways to streamline their own operations. …

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0130.013
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.013

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch-Technology ManagementSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207