Mathematical Model of Benefits and Costs of Coal Mining Environmental
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental sustainability is a key issue of the coal mining sector. This is because the impact of damages on activities undertaken in this sector is deemed vulnerable to environmental sustainability. The damage that occurs has an impact on environmental unsustainability. The value of environmental sustainability is set forth in the Government Regulation No. 46 of 2017 on Environmental Economic Instruments. Under this regulation, any activity that has an impact on the environment including the coal mining sector shall assess the damage it causes. The mathematical model of environmental benefits and cost of coal mining discovered by Juniah (2013), is an expansion of the extended mathematical model of the benefits and costs of Munasinghe (1997). This model can be used and implemented to assess environmental losses and determine the value of environmental sustainability of coal mining as intended by the Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia. The environmental losses can be minimized by utilizing water void mine as raw water. This model can also be used by government, stakeholders, and mining investors to assess the sustainability of the coal mining environment for the resulting externalities, and the utilization of mine void water as raw water.
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 | 0.000 | 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".