MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525751721 · doi:10.11159/mmme16.121

Influence of Pulsation Frequency in Iron Oxide Jigging

2016· article· en· W2525751721 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
André Carlos Silva, Raphael Silva Tomáz, Débora Nascimento Sousa, Elenice Maria Schons Silva, Mariana Resende Barros, Thales Prado Fontes

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Federal GoiásConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de GoiásCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of pigments for the civilization is obvious and well documented.Although these materials have been discovered many years ago, research continues nowadays.Industries often require new shades, colours and more homogeneous and stable pigments.The selection of mineral pigments is of major importance to acquire high quality, colour, purity and mostly free of chemical contaminants, such as chemicals from froth flotation process.The region of Catalão, Brazil, has several minerals species in the site, including apatite, barite, magnetite, monazite, niobium, titanite and vermiculite.Nowadays phosphate, niobium and barite are economically exploited.For the production of these minerals, the magnetite is removed through magnetic separation and sent to a tailings dam.The aim of this study is to evaluate the possibility of producing iron oxide to be used as pigments as well as to evaluate the pulsation frequency influence in the jigging process.A Denver jig, in lab scale was used.Test were carried out using six different particle sizes and four pulsation frequencies, keeping the water flow rate fixed at 20 litres per minute.The results indicate that iron oxide production for pigments is viable from phosphate rock tailings, since it was possible to produce magnetite concentrated with grades over 90% and magnetite recovery around 40%.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207