MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024948710 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/2025_35

Tools for validating and creating reliable fault models

2020· article· en· W3024948710 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Danielson, Derek Kinakin, Ian Stilwell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)Leverage (statistics)Slope stabilityScalabilityFault (geology)Computer scienceGeologyGeotechnical engineeringDatabaseSeismologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable 3D fault models are critically important for open pit slope design and slope stability assessment. Fault-influenced slope failures are major geotechnical hazards which frequently result in production slowdowns and require mitigation through design changes or depressurisation. Despite its importance in assessing slope stability, 3D fault model development is often left to the mine geologists or external geological consultants, whose focus is commonly the distribution of ore, not geotechnical hazard. This study presents a data-driven, semi-automated method for validating, identifying, and mapping faults that can influence slope stability. The tools are developed using the Python programming language’s freely available scientific computing libraries. These scalable libraries are used to leverage and visualise massive datasets, like blasthole drilling data or rock quality designation (RQD) to assess and improve fault models. Two case studies are provided to illustrate the application of the tools.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

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 topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207