MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515339140 · doi:10.1061/9780784480137.035

Tailings Disposal Challenges and Prospects for Oil Sands Mining Operations

2016· article· en· W2515339140 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michel Aubertin, Gord McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueGeo-Chicago 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalBGC Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsOil sandsLand reclamationConsolidation (business)AsphaltEnvironmental scienceWaste managementMining engineeringGeologyEngineeringBusinessArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tailings produced from using water to extract the bitumen from oil sands operations in Alberta, Canada, are deposited in ponds behind dykes. Several types of tailings accumulate in large ponds, including coarse tailings and fluid fine tailings generated from the main extraction processes, and froth treatment tailings generated when bitumen is cleaned. These ponds pose significant geotechnical and geo-environmental challenges during tailings disposal and for site reclamation. The main concerns are related to the slow consolidation and slow strength gain of tailings, the quantity, quality and fate of process-affected water, and the long term safety of dykes. This article recalls and discusses some of the key challenges related to tailings management technologies and identifies some prospects for the future, based on the main observations from a report recently produced by an expert panel for the council of Canadian academies.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeo-Chicago 2016Same topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207