MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998100684 · doi:10.1680/jenge.18.00168

Development of an oil sands tailings management simulation model

2020· article· en· W2998100684 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Beier, David C. Sego

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Geotechnics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsDewateringConsolidation (business)Oil sandsMining engineeringEnvironmental scienceDeposition (geology)Tailings damPetroleum engineeringProcess (computing)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mine tailings management systems (TMSs) consist of a web of interrelated subsystems across multiple processes and disciplines. Conventional predictive models simulate individual physical processes but lack integration with the overall TMS. A dynamic system-modelling approach was adopted to develop a model capable of simulating a TMS to facilitate the evaluation of operating strategies, design alternatives and dewatering technologies. Using a multitude of process-based, empirical and qualitative formulations, the model incorporates the major components of a TMS, including tailings production, dewatering, deposition and impoundment water balance. Individual model processes (e.g. consolidation and deposition) were verified using experimental, analytical or numerical data sets. A tailings plan from a hard-rock mine was then simulated to evaluate the model. The simulated tailings deposit and water cap elevations as well as total impoundment volume were found to be within 5% deviation of the mine data, indicating that the model is capable of simulating a TMS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental GeotechnicsSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207