MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811341714

Cobalt supply: : Alternatives and additions

2016· article· en· W2811341714 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Industrial Minerals

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Minerals · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCobaltCobalt extraction techniquesTonneEnvironmental scienceWaste managementNatural resource economicsMining engineeringChemistryMetallurgyEngineeringMaterials scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The $2.65bn deal is the biggest private investment in the DRC's history, and was designed to secure China's supply of cobalt. According to the Cobalt Development Institute (CDI), 94% of global cobalt supplies come from nickel and copper miners that produce cobalt as a minor by-product. Only 6% of global cobalt supplies come from primary cobalt mines that might be able to increase production in response to growing demand from the battery industry. Currently no cobalt is mined as a pure-play. However, Broken Hill Prospecting (BPL) owns two cobalt deposits within two granted mining leases (ML66 and ML67) in New South Wales, Australia, containing 35.7m tonnes at 1.85lbs/tonne cobalt (0.084% cobalt) with potential for an additional 37-59m tonnes between 0.0775-0.084% cobalt. Formation Metals Inc. is a well-established Canadian mineral exploration and mine development company focused on cobalt production in Idaho, US. Its 100%-owned Idaho Cobalt Project (ICP) is a high grade primary-cobalt deposit that has the potential to process concentrates into cobalt sulfate, copper sulfate

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.015

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial MineralsSame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207