MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2226213745

The use of a large-strain consolidation model to optimise multilift tailing deposits

2015· article· en· W2226213745 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Philip J. Vardon, Y. Yao, Leon A. van Paassen, A.F. van Tol

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Repository (Delft University of Technology) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShell Canada
KeywordsTailingsConsolidation (business)Deposition (geology)Environmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringShrinkageGeologyMaterials scienceMetallurgyComposite material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thin-lift atmospheric fine drying (AFD) is a technique used to dewater mine and oil sand tailings, which utilises both self-weight consolidation and atmospheric evaporation. The disposed layers undergo a cyclic drying and rewetting process due to precipitation and deposition of additional lifts on top of the dried layer. The current research aims to optimise the deposition process via use of a numerical model and realistic atmospheric conditions, including both periods of drying and wetting. The model is based upon water balance and includes large strain considerations. A number of material behaviours are characterised using empirical fitting curves based upon laboratory measurement of material characteristics, including both the shrinkage and water retention curves for drying and rewetting. The model is able to model multiple lifts, simulating field scale and realistic climatic conditions within timescales suitable for engineering practice (eg seconds or minutes). The model has been previously validated against controlled laboratory experiments and utilised to simulate field tests. A series of simulations are presented to illustrate the ability of the model to be used as a practical tool for the optimisation of a tailings deposition strategy.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Repository (Delft University of Technology)Same topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207