MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153539539 · doi:10.46873/2300-3960.1143

Siting a centralised processing centre for artisanal and small-scale mining - a spatial multi-criteria approach

2021· article· en· W3153539539 on OpenAlex
Nash Amoah, Eric Stemn

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Mining · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoprocessingUnavailabilityGeospatial analysisScale (ratio)StakeholderData collectionData processingEnvironmental planningGeographyComputer scienceEngineeringCartographyDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artisanal and small-scale mining is one of the global phenomena that is a threat to environmental health and safety. There are ambiguities in the manner in which an ore-processing facility operates. These ambiguities can cause environmental problems and hinder the mining capacity of these miners in Ghana. The vast majority of attempts to address these problems through the establishments of centralised processing centres have failed, with only a handful of successes. This research sought to use an established data-driven, geographic information based system to locate a centralised gold processing facility within the Wassa Amenfi-Prestea Mining Area in the Western region of Ghana. The study was designed to first determine the relevant factors that should be considered in the decision-making process for locating a centralised ore-processing facility. Secondly, it sought to implement the identified factors in a case study by identifying specific geospatial techniques that can best be applied to identify potential sites. By adopting in-depth consultations with four stakeholder groups for data collection and content analysis for data analysis, thirteen relevant factors were identified. However, in the case study, due to data unavailability, only seven of the factors were considered. Geoprocessing techniques including buffering and overlay analysis and multi-criteria decision analysis were employed to develop a model to identify the most preferred locations to site a centralised processing facility. Site characterisations and environmental considerations, incorporating identified constraints, to determine an appropriate location were selected. The final map output indicates estimated potential sites identified for the establishment of a centralised processing centre. The results obtained provide areas suitable for consideration.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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