Simultaneous stochastic optimisation of an open-pit gold mining complex with waste management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simultaneous stochastic optimisation manages risk and capitalises on the unique interactions that occur in a mining complex, where materials are transferred between mines, processors, stockpiles, and waste facilities to achieve a marketable product. Typically, when optimising the production schedule, the primary focus is to deliver valuable products to the market. However, this tends to ignore the environmental and economic impact of simplifying waste management requirements, including the storage and disposal of waste material. Stricter regulations and engineering requirements are transforming past mining practices to develop more sustainable operations. These transformations increase the financial cost of waste management and identify the requirement to integrate waste management into the production schedule. Additionally, misrepresenting the material uncertainty and variability associated with the amount of waste produced can impact, both, the stakeholders and the profitability of a mining complex. In this case study, a simultaneous stochastic optimisation approach is applied in a gold mining complex that integrates waste management into the long-term production schedule. The resulting schedule leads to a 6% increase in the net present value when compared to a conventional approach, while minimising the likelihood of deviating from production targets and ensuring permit constraints are satisfied.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".