Redox potential measurement during pressure oxidation (POX) of a refractory gold ore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pressure oxidation (POX) leaching has been commercially applied to refractory gold ores since the 1980s. In the process, sulphide material is oxidised and dissolved in order to release the gold encapsulated in the sulphide matrix, making the gold available for further recovery. Redox potential is a significant parameter during POX; however, it is measured ex situ only at atmospheric conditions. In situ redox potential measurement would provide instant information that allows adjusting the process parameters accordingly. In the present study, redox potential measurements were performed during POX of sulphide material at high temperatures and high pressures. The working electrode was an Ir electrode combined with a flow-through reference electrode in a novel and robust configuration. Experiments were performed in a 2 L titanium autoclave, at 200–220°C, 345–760 kPa oxygen overpressure, and 10–30% solids mass fraction. Temperature and oxygen pressure conditions were selected in order to reflect POX of refractory gold ores. Results show that the Ir electrode is consistent with theory and is able to perform well under these conditions, showing promise as a new in situ sensor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".