MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Geotechnical risk management for open pit mine closure: a sub-arctic and semi-arid case study

2019· article· en· W2970754445 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMine closure · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDesjardinsDe Beers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDewateringGeologyAridMining engineeringClosure (psychology)LithologyExcavationOpen-pit miningHydrology (agriculture)Geotechnical engineeringGeochemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De Beers is currently developing closure plans for two open pit mines. At first glance they appear quite similar; both are relatively remote, have operated for 10 years, have similar pit dimensions (250–300 m deep and 1.5 km wide) and have Palaeozoic sedimentary host lithologies with weak upper units overlying more competent lower materials. However, Victor Mine in the sub-Arctic Canada, is one of De Beers wettest mines (dewatering volume of 75,000 m3/d) and is hosted predominantly in good quality limestone with excellent final wall performance. While Voorspoed Mine, in semi-arid Southern Africa required virtually no dewatering, has poor wall performance associated many with mudstone and country rock breccia instabilities. Victor Mine is expected to achieve stable pit lake in less than 10 years (and less than 2 years with supplementation from a nearby river), while Voorspoed will take over 100 years to reach ultimate pit lake level (due to low groundwater inflows, high evaporation and limited opportunity for flow supplementation). This paper describes a process to determine closure stability design acceptance criteria (DAC) and characterise the zone of long-term surface disturbance surrounding the pit (i.e.: potentially unstable pit edge zone to define the closure exclusion zone). This involved: These results along with the well documented historical slope performance provided the basis for detailed Geotechnical Risk Assessments which addressed two periods. Risk-based monitoring plans were developed along with Trigger Action Response Plans (TARPs) to ensure that closure of the pit proceeds safely and efficiently while satisfying the regulatory requirements.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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