MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281671994 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6606521

Garson Mine Long Short-Term Memory Network

2022· dissertation· en· W4281671994 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josephine Morgenroth

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeoscience and Mining Technology
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Computer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digitalization of underground excavations has resulted in increasing access to large amounts of data for rock engineering professionals. Data-driven approaches, such as machine learning algorithms, present an opportunity to aid data interpretation. At Garson Mine, a 112-year-old nickel mine near Sudbury, Canada, the microseismic database is used to manually calibrate a complex mine-scale finite difference model, which is in turn used to assess seismic risk to inform mine operations and scheduling. The manual model calibration is tedious and time consuming. This research proposes a Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) network to assist in finite difference model calibration by forecasting the stresses in the model. The LSTM is trained using the microseismic database, the geology and geomechanical parameters from the existing FLAC3D model. Two LSTM networks are developed and compared for Garson Mine: one that predicts the principal stresses and another that predicts the six-component stress tensor at each zone centroid in the FLAC3D model. Various LSTM network hyperparameters were analyzed to determine the optimal architecture for the two sets of targets, including: input encoding and pre-processing, training solver, network layer architecture, and cost function. Architectures were chosen based on three performance metrics: the corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc), coefficient of determination (R2), and percent capture (%C). This study found that similar LSTM network architectures are able to adequately predict both principal stresses and the complete stress tensor, however, the ensemble variance was larger when predicting the complete stress tensor. When predicting the principal stresses, AICc was -59.62, R2 was 0.996, and %C was 97%, and when predicting the six-component stress tensor AICc was -45.50, R2 was 0.997, and %C was 80%. This research represents progress towards continuous, automated calibration of complex numerical models, whereby earlier and more accurate forecasts of changes in stress conditions will allow earlier intervention and reaction to challenging stress environments, leading to increased safety of excavations and mine personnel.

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)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicGeoscience and Mining TechnologyFrench-language works237,207