Investigation of the effect of particle size, petrographic composition, and rank on the flotation of Western Canadian coals
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
Coal is one of the most crucial natural resources used for steel and energy production. To improve its utilization properties, the run-of-mine coal is processed to remove undesirable impurities such as mineral matter and sulfur. The fine coal is usually processed by flotation, and the efficiency is highly dependent on the particle size, maceral composition, and the rank. The effect of particle size and reagent dosages are usually the most commonly studied parameters for flotation, whereas optimization through the study of the response of the petrographic components and the rank based on the vitrinites’ reflectance of coal particles (V-types) are rarely investigated.This paper studied the floatability of coal particles in terms of their physical and compositional attributes including particle size, petrographic composition, and rank (V-types) from coal blends representing different feeds to the plant. The results showed that the higher content of inertinite macerals and a high quantity of ultra-fines contributed to a poor floatability for the studied coals. On the other hand, the coal sample containing vitrinite particles from a higher rank exhibited a much better flotation response, despite the presence of significant amounts of ultra-fine.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it