MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408454559 · doi:10.1016/j.ijmst.2014.11.006

Fundamental behaviours of production traffic in underground mine haulage ramps

2015· article· en· W2408454559 on OpenAlexafffund
David B. Haviland, Joshua A. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mining Science and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityGolder Associates (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHaulageProductivityInefficiencyEngineeringProduction (economics)Automotive engineeringMining engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ramps (or declines) are often used in underground mines to transport ore, waste, materials, and personnel. This paper studies mine ramp productivity and presents results from a set of computer simulations designed to model the fundamental behaviours of ramp haulage systems. Simulations show that, under fundamental assumptions without random disturbances, the haulage system always converges to a periodic behaviour in the steady state, but that productivities vary between equilibria. Simulations also demonstrate how productivity per vehicle does not necessarily decrease as more vehicles are added and, for example, in the five-vehicle case, how a 3.1% improvement can be achieved over the use of four vehicles. The result reveals the inefficiency of commonly-used lockout-style vehicle coordination strategies, and suggests a possible avenue for improving the productivity of haulage ramps by controlling the system to achieve more productive behaviours.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mining Science and TechnologySame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207