Blast damage zone influence on groundwater fluxes through backfilled open pits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blast damage zone (BDZ) surrounding backfilled pits could significantly influence groundwater flow, increase flowrate through backfilled wastes, and potentially increase the dispersion of contaminants to the environment. A conceptual model of the fracture network of the BDZ was first proposed, which consisted of circular fracture oriented along the pit walls, and with a decreasing density with the distance to it. Realistic model parameters were also estimated based on the literature; BDZ equivalent permeability was analytically derived and used in 3D numerical models of conic open pits considering different backfilling scenarios. A total of 16 500 BDZ models were generated to assess the general influence of the BDZ on the flow and the influence of each parameter (fracture trace and attenuation length and fracture radius, aperture, and anisotropy). Results showed that the BDZ generally contributes to reduce (up to three orders of magnitude) the groundwater flow through backfilled tailings, but contributes to increase (by up to 250%) the flow in backfilled waste rocks, especially for wide and fractured BDZ in small pits. This study therefore suggests that the BDZ could be a self-sufficient containment structure to limit contaminant transports from backfilled tailings to the environment, but increases the risk considering waste rock.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".