Optimizing mining complexes with multiple processing and transportation alternatives: An uncertainty-based approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mining complexes contain multiple sequential activities that are strongly interrelated. Extracting the material from different sources may be seen as the first main activity, and any change in the sequence of extraction of the mining blocks modify the activities downstream, including blending, processing and transporting the processed material to final stocks or ports. Similarly, modifying the conditions of operation at a given processing path or the transportation systems implemented may affect the suitability of using a mining sequence previously optimized. This paper presents a method to generate mining, processing and transportation schedules that account for the previously mentioned activities (or stages) associated with the mining complex simultaneously. The method uses an initial solution generated using conventional optimizers and improves it by mean of perturbations associated to three different levels of decision: block based perturbations, operating alternative based perturbations and transportation system based perturbation. The method accounts for geological uncertainty of several deposits by considering scenarios originated from combinations of their respective stochastic orebody simulations. The implementation of the method in a multipit copper operation shows its ability to reduce deviations from capacity and blending targets while improving the expected NPV (cumulative discounted cash flows), which highlight the importance of stochastic optimizers given their ability to generate more value with less risk.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".