A REVIEW OF EXPLOSIVE-FREE ROCK BREAKAGE (EFRB) TECHNOLOGIES IN MINING INDUSTRY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A REVIEW OF EXPLOSIVE-FREE ROCK BREAKAGE (EFRB) TECHNOLOGIES IN MINING INDUSTRY Abstract There are strategic drivers within the mining industry which are making explosive-free rock breakage approaches an option that is being reconsidered for the excavation of rock masses. A comprehensive review of the performance and related aspects of explosive-free rock breaking (EFRB) technologies is necessary to assess and demonstrate their applicability in the mining industry, particularly in continuous operations and autonomous mining. Additionally, it would facilitate a clear path of research and development. A comprehensive review of rock breakage technologies and expert projects would also provide sufficient understanding from available information and expert opinions of the advantages, limitations, and broad performance specifications of existing and promising EFRB methods for open pit and underground mining applications. The main EFRB technologies include mechanical cutting, microwave, laser, fluid, thermal and electrical applications. Finally, the application of microwave irradiation of rocks has been conducted successfully in the laboratory as a high potential concept. The approach can be expanded to full-scale field implementation as a pre-conditioning tool to facilitate the mechanical breakdown of rock in a continuous fashion as well as possible destressing of rock under high stress. A reduction in mechanical strength of rocks as a result of microwave irradiation could improve the performance of rock excavation equipment such as a tunnel boring machine. This will be increasing the rate of penetration and reducing operation time. Keywords: Mining, Rock breakage, Fragmentation, Explosive-free, Excavation
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".