The Treatment of the Carmack’s Copper-Gold Ore by Acid Leaching and Cyanide Leaching with SART Recovery of Copper and Cyanide from Barren Cyanide Solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Western Copper's Carmacks copper-gold deposit in the Yukon Territory, Canada contains copper and gold values. The copper mineralization is oxidized and acid soluble, and the gold is free milling and may be extracted by cyanidation. The current treatment plan is to recover the copper by heap leaching, and SX/EW. The challenge of this deposit is to be able to economically extract the remaining gold. In this work, a series of tests were conducted to process a mineral sample for copper extraction by acid column leaching followed by cyanidation for gold extraction. The barren gold solution was then treated by the SART process (sulfidization, acidification, recycle, thickening) for copper recovery as copper sulfide and cyanide recycle. The results of this work were very encouraging with 65% direct copper extraction with acid and 76-82% Au extraction from the copper leach residue by cyanidation. Approximately 21-27% of the copper was co-extracted in cyanidation. SART treatment of the cyanide solution (after carbon adsorption) recovered greater than 95% of the copper as a synthetic copper sulfide precipitate. Additionally, a significant portion of the molybdenum in the ore also leached and was precipitated in the SART process. After filtration and re-neutralization, the recovered cyanide solution was suitable for recycling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".