MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210846320 · doi:10.17159/2411-9717/1367/2021

Integration of strategic open-pit mine planning into hierarchical artificial intelligence

2021· article· en· W4210846320 on OpenAlexaff
Aldo Quelopana, Alessandro Navarra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)ComputationMetaheuristicEngineeringAlgorithmMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mine production scheduling problem (MPSP) has been studied since the 1960s, and remains an active area of computational research. In extending the concepts of the MPSP, the automated mine may now be regarded as a hierarchical intelligent agent in which the bottom layer consists of distributed robotic equipment, while strategic functionality occupies the higher layers. Here we present a disambiguation of artificial intelligence, machine learning, computational optimization, and automation within the mining context. Specifically, the Q-learning algorithm has been adapted to generate the initial solutions for a high-performing strategic mine planning algorithm, originally developed by Lamghari, Dimitrakopoulos and Ferland, based on the variable neighbourhood descent (VND) metaheuristic. The hierarchical intelligent agent is presented as an integrative conceptual platform, defining the interaction between our new Q-learning adaptation and Lamghari's VND, and potentially other hierarchically controlled components of an artificially intelligent mine, having various degrees of automation. Sample computations involving Q-learning and VND are presented.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and MetallurgySame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207