MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3026000609 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/2025_21

Case study: analysis of a highwall toppling failure and development of a successful mine re-entry plan using RS2, RocFall and Dan-W at a coal mine in Canada

2020· article· en· W3026000609 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cameron Clayton, Adam Jackson, Jack Price, Andrew Bidwell, Davide Elmo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsTetra Tech (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoal miningMining engineeringPlan (archaeology)CoalGeologyEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A highwall failure at an open pit coal mine in western Alberta, Canada occurred on 9 July 2017. A larger failure occurred on 5 August 2017. Radar monitoring successfully identified this second failure prior to the event. The initial assessment of the failure mechanism suggested toppling of steep bedding. The stratigraphy of the highwall consists of thinly to thickly bedded sedimentary strata dipping south at angles of about 65 to 70° into the wall. Neither failure resulted in injury or damage to vehicles or infrastructure, however, mining of the pit was suspended pending an assessment of the wall stability and the development of an appropriate reentry mining plan. Following the failure, two principal hazards remained. The eastern portion of the highwall slope was characterised by potential rockfall hazards beneath the failed slope area. The western portion of the slope was characterised by a larger rock mass which had not failed and presented a toppling hazard and potential debris runout hazard. Prior to re-entry into the pit, a re-entry strategy was developed to allow mining of the remaining coal to be completed safely. The overall stability of the slope geometry was evaluated using RS2™ finite element modelling methods, and re-entry strategies involving crest unloading to reduce the remaining failure hazard were assessed. A rockfall analysis for the eastern portion of the slope was completed using RocFall™, calibrated against observed conditions. A runout analysis of the western portion of the slope was completed using Dan-W™, calibrated against observed conditions. The results of the rockfall and runout analyses were used to design appropriately sized berms located at the toe of the slope. The re-entry plan incorporated the rockfall berm design, a rockfall runout setback distance for the berm, and crest unloading on two sequential single benches. The mitigation strategy was supplemented by radar monitoring. This paper summarises the analyses that were completed to develop a safe, fit-for-purpose re-entry strategy that has since been successfully implemented.

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)0.001
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designCase report
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→