MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319391825 · doi:10.21000/jasmr06021156

MEASUREMENT OF OXYGEN CONSUMPTION AND DIFFUSION IN EXPOSED AND COVERED REACTIVE MINE TAILINGS

2006· article· en· W2319391825 on OpenAlexafffund
Vincent Martin, Michel Aubertin, Bruno Bussière, Mamert Mbonimpa, Anne-Marie Dagenais, Mathieu Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal American Society of Mining and Reclamation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsAgnico Eagle (Canada)Polytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTailingsDiffusionOxygenConsumption (sociology)Mining engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologyMetallurgyMaterials scienceChemistryArtThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When sulphidic tailings are exposed to atmospheric conditions, oxygen can flow in the material where it will be consumed by oxidation reactions.This paper presents results from a project studying the in situ oxygen diffusion and consumption in tailings.It provides measured values for the oxygen reaction rate K r and the effective diffusion D e coefficients based on oxygen consumption and diffusion tests that are performed under various conditions.Based on the test results, the K r and D e values determined in situ are compared to values obtained through simple predictive models.Results indicate that the value of these two parameters is influenced by factors such as the degree of saturation S r and in situ porosity n.A lower S r or a higher n may increase the oxygen flux toward the reactive tailings, which can increase the production rate of acid mine drainage (AMD).

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal American Society of Mining and ReclamationSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207