MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of cyclone technology in paste backfill plant design

2013· article· en· W2888370640 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Landriault, Pierre Primeau

Bibliographic record

VenuePaste/˜Pœaste · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDewateringCyclone (programming language)Aggregate (composite)Process (computing)Coal preparation plantEnvironmental scienceTailingsWaste managementProcess engineeringEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringCoalComputer scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically cyclone technology has been used for classification and dewatering purposes in mineral processing. It has also been extensively used in the preparation of suitable material for hydraulic backfill. Conversely when it comes to paste backfill plant design, thickening and filtration technology is typically used, and where high backfill strength is required, classified aggregate is often added. These are viable and accepted practices for the preparation of paste backfill; however, in certain applications the use of cyclones within the paste preparation process provides alternatives which can result in lower capital and/or operating cost for the paste backfill system. This paper will present novel applications of cyclone classification and dewatering technologies in the preparation of paste backfill. Specifically, the paper will discuss how cyclones can be used in certain applications to dewater the tailings without the need for thickeners, thereby lowering the capital cost and/or reducing the cement binder requirements and consequently lowering the operating cost. Examples of projects where the use of cyclone classification was considered during the development of the process flow sheet highlights the drivers for its incorporation in the resulting paste backfill systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaste/˜PœasteSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207