MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293340705 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10411

MineralMate: A standalone MATLAB-based aide for the magnetic separation of minerals

2022· article· en· W4293340705 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Bowman, Danny Hnatyshin

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsMagnetic separationWorkflowStockpileSeparator (oil production)MATLABMineral processingComputer scienceProcess engineeringMagnetic susceptibilityMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringMetallurgyPhysicsThermodynamicsDatabaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MineralMate is a standalone MATLAB-based program designed to optimize the workflow associated with the magnetic separation of minerals. For nearly every bulk geochemical analysis some amount of mineral separation must occur, and the use of an electromagnetic separator is ubiquitous and considered as standard practice in many fields. Despite the commonality in which magnetic separation is used, there are considerable shortcomings. Electromagnet overheating and composite mineral grains are frequently encountered, as well as poorly constrained mineral behavior. These complications ultimately reduce the quality of downstream geochemical data. MineralMate is designed to alleviate these shortcomings by quickly and efficiently producing a magnetic separation workflow allowing the user to: (1) identify and compare optimal recovery ranges for different minerals from a bulk mineral assemblage, (2) identify the parameters on a conventional magnetic separator required to magnetically separate composite grains, (3) create/update user-specific magnetic susceptibility databases through empirical data collection, and (4) utilize an alternative magnetic separation equation.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207