The development of a ground support design strategy for deep mines subjected to dynamic-loading conditions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In underground mines, a ground support system is required to maintain the integrity of an excavation over its service life. The design of support systems typically accounts for the anticipated static loads and is, to some extent, supported by quantitative engineering guidelines. In deep and high stress mines, dynamic loads associated with mining-induced seismicity represent an important component of the demand imposed on the support. Quantifying dynamic loads that apply on, and between, reinforcement and surface support elements is an important challenge. In this respect, the design of ground support systems for dynamicloading conditions has relied importantly on qualitative assessments of support performance. This paper presents a ground support design strategy, supported by high-quality field data, for deep and high stress mines subjected to dynamic-loading conditions. The strategy has been developed and validated using rockburst data from three seismically active mines located in the Sudbury region, Canada, and cumulating 32 years of mining.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it