MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321186856 · doi:10.1002/ese3.1424

A novel non‐pillar coal mining technology in longwall top coal caving: A case study

2023· article· en· W4321186856 on OpenAlexaff
Haosen Wang, Jiong Wang, Manchao He, Zimin Ma, Xichun Tian, Peng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Science & Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeomechanics and Mining Engineering
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsRoofLongwall miningMining engineeringCoalCoal miningGangueExcavationDeformation (meteorology)EngineeringBearing (navigation)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In longwall top coal caving (LTCC) mining methods, problems such as large deformations, loss of coal resources, and excavation relay out of balance are often encountered with the increased production in single mining panels. To address these problems, a novel non‐pillar coal mining technology in LTCC was used based on the equilibrium mining theory. This approach could cut off the stress transmission, eliminate the coal pillar, and retain the gob‐side entry. In this technology, the entry is first excavated along the roof of the coal, and then four techniques are applied to control the surrounding rock of the retained entry. The constant resistance and large deformation anchor cable are used to maintain the roof stability. The directional roof split blasting technique is adopted to separate the roof between the entry and gob. The blocking‐gangue support system (BGSS) is used to form the gangue rib lagging the mining panel. The temporary support system is applied to prevent the roadway from being affected by the dynamic pressure and prevented the BGSS from falling. Finally, the field monitoring results indicate that the surrounding rock of retained entry is stabilized at 200 m behind the working face. The deformation of retained entry is within a reasonable range at 180–190 m behind the mining panel. The results provide an important reference for the thick coal seam non‐pillar coal mining technology, specifically using this technology in LTCC panels.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Science & EngineeringSame topicGeomechanics and Mining EngineeringFrench-language works237,207