A Multiple Objective Genetic Algorithm Approach for Stochastic Open Pit Production Scheduling Optimisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conventional approach to mine planning is to use a single estimated orebody model as the basis for production scheduling. This approach, however, does not consider grade uncertainties associated with grade estimation. These uncertainties have a significant impact on the net present value (NPV) and can only be accounted for when modelled as part of the production scheduling optimisation problem. In this research, a set of equally probable simulated orebodies generated through Sequential Gaussian Simulation is used as input to a stochastic optimisation model solved with genetic algorithm (GA). Grade variability is considered as part of the stochastic model. The problem definition and resource constraints are formulated and optimised using a specially designed mining-specific GA. This GA is employed to handle partial block processing through a specialised chromosome encoding technique resulting in near-optimal solutions. Two case studies are presented which compare results from the stochastic model solved with GA (SGA) and a Stochastic Mixed Integer Linear Programming (SMILP) model solved with CPLEX. For the second case study, while the SMILP model was at an optimality gap of 101% after 28 days, the SGA model generated an NPV of $10,045 M at 10.16% optimality gap after 1.5 h.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".