MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532768253 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0235

Thermal properties of oil sands fluid fine tailings: laboratory and in situ testing methods

2016· article· en· W2532768253 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kathryn A. Dompierre, S. Lee Barbour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsTailingsOil sandsAsphaltEnvironmental scienceGroundwaterFast Fourier transformGeotechnical engineeringTailings damGeologyThermalThermal conductivityMining engineeringPetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgyComposite materialMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluid fine tailings (FFT) are soft tailings produced by the bitumen extraction process associated with open-pit oil sands mining. Oil sands mine operators have proposed the use of end pit lakes (EPLs) to contain soft tailings and Syncrude Canada Ltd. has developed the first EPL in the industry. This EPL, referred to as Base Mine Lake, contains FFT transferred from an above-ground tailings facility in a mined-out pit. The FFT was placed at elevated temperatures relative to natural groundwater temperatures in the region, so the FFT will act as a long-term source of heat. Evaluation of the thermal regime within the EPL requires the characterization of the thermal properties of FFT. Laboratory testing was undertaken to measure the thermal properties (thermal conductivity and volumetric heat capacity) of the FFT over a range of water contents and to evaluate the effect of bitumen content on the thermal properties. Field testing was also undertaken to verify that these properties were similar in the undisturbed FFT, measured at a larger scale.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207