MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999658462 · doi:10.1155/2020/5828514

Roof Movement and Failure Behavior When Mining Extra‐Thick Coal Seams Using Upward Slicing Longwall‐Roadway Cemented Backfill Technology

2020· article· en· W2999658462 on OpenAlexaff
Xuejie Deng, Zongxuan Yuan, Lixin Lan, B. de Wit

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Materials Science and Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersState Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safe MiningNatural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang ProvinceChina University of Mining and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRoofCoal miningSlicingLongwall miningDeflection (physics)Mining engineeringCoalGeologyGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel and environmental‐friendly backfill mining method known as upward slicing longwall‐roadway cemented backfill (USLCB) technology has recently been proposed and successfully applied in mines extracting extra‐thick coal seams located under sensitive areas. This paper studies the effects USLCB had on roof movement and failure behavior using the mechanical analysis approach. The application of USLCB in the Gonggeyingzi Mine is taken as a case study with roof movement behavior being monitored over a single mining cycle, as well as over multiple mining cycles of different coal slices. In addition, backfill performance requirements to prevent roof failures where USLCB is implemented are studied. The results show that the deflection curves of the roof at the end of each mining cycle during mining the first and the six slices are symmetrical, but they change from asymmetrical to symmetrical during the mining progresses of the second slice to the fifth slice. The final state of roof movement after the first slice, and through to the fifth slice, displays an obvious “flat bottom” pattern in the middle of the deflection curve. The roof movement during the removal of the top slice is noticeably different from other slices. The results also show that the requirements of the elastic modulus, as well as the strength of the backfill, increase as the number of mined slices increases from 1 to 5, but the requirements drop sharply for mining the top slice.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207