MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313431239 · doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2022.107971

Dry laboratories – Mapping the required instrumentation and infrastructure for online monitoring, analysis, and characterization in the mineral industry

2022· article· en· W4313431239 on OpenAlexaff
Yousef Ghorbani, Steven E. Zhang, Glen T. Nwaila, Julie E. Bourdeau, Mehdi Safari, Seyed Hadi Hoseinie, Phumzile C. Nwaila, Jari Ruuska

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
FundersLuleå Tekniska Universitet
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)Data qualityBeneficiationData managementComputer scienceEngineeringData scienceData miningChemistryOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dry laboratories (dry labs) are laboratories dedicated to using and creating data (they are data-centric). Several aspects of the minerals industry (e.g., exploration, extraction and beneficiation) generate multi-scale and multivariate data that are ultimately used to make decisions. Dry labs and digitalization are closely and intricately linked in the minerals industry. This paper focuses on the instrumentation and infrastructure that are required for accelerating digital transformation initiatives in the minerals sector. Specifically, we are interested in the ability of current and emerging instrumentation, sensors and infrastructure to capture relevant information, generate and transport high-quality data. We provide an essential examination of existing literature and an understanding of the 21st century minerals industry. Critical analysis of the literature and review of the current configuration of the minerals industry revealed similar data management and infrastructure needs for all segments of the minerals industry. There are, however, differences in the tools and equipment used at different stages of the mineral value chain. As demand for data-driven approaches grows, and as data resulting from each segment of the minerals industry continues to increase in abundance, diversity and dimensionality, the tools that manage and utilize such data should evolve in a way that is more transdisciplinary (e.g., data management, artificial intelligence, machine learning and data science). Ideally, data should be managed in a dry lab environment, but minerals industry data is currently and historically disaggregated. Consequently, digitalization in the minerals industry must be coupled with dry laboratories through a systematic transition. Sustained generation of high-quality data is critical to sustain the highly desirable uses of data, such as artificial intelligence-based insight generation.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinerals EngineeringSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207