MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308694276 · doi:10.3390/mining2040038

Autonomous and Operator-Assisted Electric Rope Shovel Performance Study

2022· article· en· W4308694276 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMining · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShovelAutomationTruckOperator (biology)Production (economics)Task (project management)ProductivityComputer scienceRopeEngineeringManufacturing engineeringAutomotive engineeringSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automation has been changing the mining industry for the past two decades. Material handling is a critical task in a mining operation, and truck-shovel handling systems are the primary method for surface mining. Mines have deployed autonomous trucks, and their positive impact on both production and safety has been reported. This paper aims to study the extent to which autonomous and operator-assisted loading units could improve different aspects of a mining operation. Four different levels of automation ranging from operator-assisted swing and return to fully autonomous for a shovel were considered. A discrete event simulation model was developed and verified using detailed data from a shovel monitoring system. Later, the developed model was deployed to assess how each of the proposed technologies could improve productivity and efficiency. Results show that up to a 41% increase in production can be achieved. Both mining companies and equipment manufacturers can use the methodology and results of this study for future decision-making and product development.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.182 · 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