MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982158442

DYNAMIC MODELLING OF A SAG MILL-PEBBLE CRUSHER CIRCUIT BY DATA-DRIVEN METHODS

2019· article· en· W2982158442 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haijie Li, Magnus Evertsson, Mats Lindqvist, Erik Hulthén, Gauti Asbjörnsson, Graham Bonn

Bibliographic record

VenueChalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrusherComminutionMillArtificial neural networkComputer sciencePower (physics)Process (computing)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a semi-autogenous grinding (SAG) mill and pebble crusher circuit, the behaviour of the comminution process is non-linear and time-varying due to wear and variations in the feed material. To describe such a complex system, data-driven models were introduced, along with a case study of a SAG mill circuit in Copper Mountain, British Columbia, Canada. This paper presented a mill power draw model using several regression algorithms like Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Random Forest (RF), and Gradient Boosting method (GBM). The results were then combined by weighted mean squared errors to perform a more accurate ensemble model. The second method considered the comminution process as a time series problem, so the original dataset was re-structured, and a forecasting SAG power model was proposed by using Long Short-Term Memory algorithm (LSTM). This LSTM forecasting model applied 20 minutes of historical data to predict 2-minute SAG power draw in advance. It was shown that both the presented methods gave promising results for SAG mill power prediction.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology)Same topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207