Optimization of the Heap Leaching Process through Changes in Modes of Operation and Discrete Event Simulation
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
The importance of mine planning is often underestimated. Nonetheless, it is essential in achieving high performance by identifying the potential value of mineral resources and providing an optimal, practical, and realistic strategy for extraction, which considers the greatest quantity of options, materials, and scenarios. Conventional mine planning is based on a mostly deterministic approach, ignoring part of the uncertainty presented in the input data, such as the mineralogical composition of the feed. This work develops a methodology to optimize the mineral recovery of the heap leaching phase by addressing the mineralogical variation of the feed, by alternating the mode of operation depending on the type of ore in the feed. The operational changes considered in the analysis include the leaching of oxide ores by adding only sulfuric acid (H2SO4) as reagent and adding chloride in the case of sulfide ores (secondary sulfides). The incorporation of uncertainty allows the creation of models that maximize the productivity, while confronting the geological uncertainty, as the extraction program progresses. The model seeks to increase the expected recovery from leaching, considering a set of equiprobable geological scenarios. The modeling and simulation of this productive phase is developed through a discrete event simulation (DES) framework. The results of the simulation indicate the potential to address the dynamics of feed variation through the implementation of alternating modes of operation.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it