MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2349261299

Gravity Recovering PGMs and Gold from Clarabelle Mill Grinding Circuit

2006· article· en· W2349261299 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Liming Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueNonferrous Metals · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArithmetic underflowHydrocycloneConcentratorGrindingPlatinum groupMaterials scienceMetallurgyPlatinumGravity separationBall millChemistryEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringCatalysisComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The centrifugal separation process of mediate products from Clarabelle mill grinding circuit of Falconbridge-Sudbury Corporation by use of the Knelson Concentrator to recover the platinum group metals and gold is investigated.The results show that the platinum group metals and gold are selectively enriched in the milling discharge and hydrocyclone underflow,the excellent result for valuable metals recovery is achieved by the combination technology with the typical Knelson concentrator and the speed-variable Knelson concentrator.The general recovery and the grade as well as the rate of Pt,Pd and Au enrichment in the two-stage centrifugal concentrate from the milling discharge are 84.70%,56.39%and 80.50%; 137.67 g/t,54.27 g/t and 155.93g/t;49.6,31.9 and 47.7,respectively.The general recovery and the grade as well as the ratio of Pt,Pd and Au enrichment in the two-stage centrifugal concentrate from the cyclone underflow are 76.52%,49.93% and 77.79%;112.70g/t,47.86g/t and 120.81g/t;42.3,27.9 and,respectively

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNonferrous MetalsSame topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207