MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466076534 · doi:10.3390/min6030068

Effect of Particle Size and Grinding Time on Gold Dissolution in Cyanide Solution

2016· article· en· W2466076534 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDissolutionParticle sizeGrindingLeaching (pedology)MetallurgyParticle (ecology)Materials scienceGold oreParticle-size distributionCyanideMineralogyChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recovery of gold by ore leaching is influenced by the size of the particles and the chemical environment. The effect of particle size on the dissolution of gold is usually studied using mono-size particles as the gold in solution comes from the ore of a unique leached particle size. This paper proposes a method to estimate the gold dissolution as a function of particle size using a bulk ore sample, i.e., with the dissolved gold coming from the various sizes of particles carried by the ore. The results are consistent with the fact that gold dissolution increases with the decreasing particle size but results also indicate that gold dissolution of the ore within a size interval is not significantly affected by the grinding time used for the ore size reduction. Results also show a good dissolution of the gold contained in the fine-size fractions without oxidation and lead nitrate pre-treatment for an ore that is known to require such pre-treatment.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
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