MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562297636 · doi:10.1080/00084433.2016.1261501

A systems approach to mineral processing based on mathematical programming

2016· article· en· W2562297636 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Navarra, Arash Rafiei, Kristian E. Waters

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcentratorComputer scienceProfitability indexRepresentation (politics)Mineral processingSample (material)Product (mathematics)Industrial engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mathematical programming (MP) is fundamental to systems engineering and operations management, but has not been widely adopted by mineral processors. The current paper presents an interdisciplinary approach, using MP to incorporate basic notions of mass balancing into an optimisation framework. The optimisation is typically related to economic profitability. Two- and three-product formulas are extended to give formal descriptions of alternate modes of operation, and a global representation of the concentrator. At this global level, the framework may assist plant managers to make tactical decisions based on incoming feed data. The MP framework is demonstrated through sample calculations describing a lead–zinc concentrator.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.197
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207