MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366390768 · doi:10.3390/ma16083220

Optimization of the SAG Grinding Process Using Statistical Analysis and Machine Learning: A Case Study of the Chilean Copper Mining Industry

2023· article· en· W4366390768 on OpenAlexaff
Manuel Saldaña, Edelmira D. Gálvez, Alessandro Navarra, Norman Toro, Luís A. Cisternas

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloUniversidad de Antofagasta
KeywordsGrindingCopperCopper mineManufacturing engineeringProcess (computing)Statistical analysisMetallurgyProcess engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceComputer scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the continuous increase in production costs and resource optimization, more than a strategic objective has become imperative in the copper mining industry. In the search to improve the efficiency in the use of resources, the present work develops models of a semi-autogenous grinding (SAG) mill using statistical analysis and machine learning (ML) techniques (regression, decision trees, and artificial neural networks). The hypotheses studied aim to improve the process's productive indicators, such as production and energy consumption. The simulation of the digital model captures an increase in production of 4.42% as a function of mineral fragmentation, while there is potential to increase production by decreasing the mill rotational speed, which has a decrease in energy consumption of 7.62% for all linear age configurations. Considering the performance of machine learning in the adjustment of complex models such as SAG grinding, the application of these tools in the mineral processing industry has the potential to increase the efficiency of these processes, either by improving production indicators or by saving energy consumption. Finally, the incorporation of these techniques in the aggregate management of processes such as the Mine to Mill paradigm, or the development of models that consider the uncertainty of the explanatory variables, could further increase the performance of productive indicators at the industrial scale.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207