MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134151733 · doi:10.5772/intechopen.96162

The Application of Artificial Neural Network to Predicting the Drainage from Waste Rock Storages

2021· book-chapter· en· W3134151733 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Liang Ma, Cheng Huang, Zhongsheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIntechOpen eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsDrainageArtificial neural networkDrainage networkProcess (computing)Field (mathematics)Drainage system (geomorphology)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable prediction of drainage flow rate and drainage chemistry is essential to the treatment of drainage from waste rock storages at mine sites. The traditional predictive models require simplification and assumption of geo-bio-chemical processes followed by intensive characterization, and sometimes lead to poor prediction accuracy. In the big data era, various sensors are installed in field to constantly monitor mine sites, which enables machine learning to utilize the generated monitoring data and study the underlying pattern behind the data. This chapter describes an approach to use artificial neural network to predict the drainage flow rate and drainage chemistry based on weather monitoring data collected at mine sites. The advantage of this approach is that generally no additional characterization are required to make prediction because the relevant geo-bio-chemical mechanisms are embedded naturally in the monitoring data, which can be captured through machine learning process.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntechOpen eBooksSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207