MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235635590 · doi:10.1016/j.mprp.2015.03.047

Rewind

2015· article· en· W4235635590 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMetal Powder Report · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZincHydrometallurgyMetallurgyElectrowinningSmeltingPyrometallurgyOxidizing agentNickelEnvironmental scienceWaste managementMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringCopper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of autoclaves for the recovery of metals, using aqueous sulphate systems, has been a focus of Sherritt Inc. for more than 40 years. Following the pioneering commercialization of a pressure hydrometallurgy process in 1954 for nickel production, Sherritt Technologies have continued to develop and assist in the commercial implementation of autoclave processes for other metals, notably gold and zinc.The direct pressure oxidation of zinc sulphide concentrates to produce zinc sulphate solutions which are suitable for conventional recovery of zinc by electrowinning, while oxidizing the sulphide sulphur only as far as its elemental form, has been promoted by Sherritt for more than 30 years. Its commercial realization in 1981 by Cominco Ltd., at Trail, B.C., has been followed by Kidd Creek Division of Falconbridge Limited at Timmins, Ontario, in 1983 and Ruhr-Zink at Datteln, Germany, in 1991. In 1993, the elimination of a zinc roaster operation was achieved by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting, through the installation of three autoclaves.This paper was prepared jointly by the operators of the pressure leach circuits at four zinc plants and focuses on the operating results and improvements achieved over the years, as well as the principal chemistry of the 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5280.348

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetal Powder ReportSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207