Production Scheduling of Open Pit Mine Using Sequential Branch-and-Cut and Longest Path Algorithm: An Application from an African Copper Mine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open pit mine production scheduling assigns mining blocks in different production periods for maximising profits after satisfying geotechnical and operational constraints. In this paper, two Open pit mine production scheduling models were applied in an African copper deposit. The first model is a traditional model with more tight resource constraints; the second model is a more robust model where resource constraints are relaxed by penalizing the objective function. Both the models were solved using two step algorithms: (a) year wise production scheduling using a sequential branch-and-cut algorithm; and (b) an iterative longest path algorithm to improve the solution generated from branch-and-cut. Results demonstrated that due to the tight constraints in Model 1, the optimizer was unable to generate a feasible solution after the first period, therefore the lower limit metal production constraint was eliminated to generate a feasible solution; however, Model 2 was able to generate a feasible solution for all periods. Results show that both the models generated nearly the same amount of ore, waste, metal content, and mine life. Model 2 generates relatively more net present value as compared to Model 1, whereas, the computational time required for solving the scheduling problem is relatively less for Model 1 than for Model 2.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".