MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W221763815

Use of high-density paste bacfill for safe disposal of copper/zinc mine tailings

2011· article· en· W221763815 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Erol Yilmaz, Tikou Belem, Mostafa Benzaazoua, Ayhan Kesimal, Bayram Erçıkdı, Ferdi Cihangir

Bibliographic record

VenueDepositum (Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTailingsCopper mineCopperZincMining engineeringEnvironmental scienceMetallurgyWaste managementGeologyMaterials scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The safe environmental disposal of sulphide-rich copper/zinc mine tailings is fast becoming a major economic factor in determining the profitability of mining operations. There have been new approaches and better technologies practised in the recent years which allow the mining industries to reduce and/or eliminate the environmental impacts of harmful mine tailings. One of these approaches is the use of high-density paste backfill (HDPB) which is consisting mainly of a mix of solid particles (with the cement) and water, containing between 70% and 85% by dry weight of solids. The increased use of HDPB has improved the reliability, and has reduced the cost of the preparation and transportation systems. This paper focuses on the potential environmental benefits of using the HDPB when tailings are acid generating, and also provides a case study conducted in an underground copper/zinc mine in northeast Turkey in order to illustrate these benefits.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.153
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations37
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDepositum (Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue)Same topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207