Stochastic Final Pit Limits: An Efficient Frontier Analysis under Geological Uncertainty in the Open-Pit Mining Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of planning the exploitation of an open-pit mine, the final pit limit problem consists of finding the volume to be extracted so that it maximizes the total profit of exploitation subject to overall slope angles to keep pit walls stable. To address this problem, the ore deposit is discretized as a block model, and efficient algorithms are used to find the optimal final pit. However, this methodology assumes a deterministic scenario, i.e., it does not consider that information, such as ore grades, is subject to several sources of uncertainty. This paper presents a model based on stochastic programming, seeking a balance between conflicting objectives: on the one hand, it maximizes the expected value of the open-pit mining business and simultaneously minimizes the risk of losses, measured as conditional value at risk, associated with the uncertainty in the estimation of the mineral content found in the deposit, which is characterized by a set of conditional simulations. This allows generating a set of optimal solutions in the expected return vs. risk space, forming the Pareto front or efficient frontier of final pit alternatives under geological uncertainty. In addition, some criteria are proposed that can be used by the decision maker of the mining company to choose which final pit best fits the return/risk trade off according to its objectives. This methodology was applied on a real case study, making a comparison with other proposals in the literature. The results show that our proposal better manages the relationship in controlling the risk of suffering economic losses without renouncing high expected profit.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".