MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366977747 · doi:10.1016/j.clwas.2023.100094

Comparative geochemical evaluation of codisposal approaches for reactive filtered tailings deposition

2023· article· en· W4366977747 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCleaner Waste Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsTailingsDeposition (geology)Environmental scienceLand reclamationWaste managementMining engineeringEnvironmental engineeringGeologyMaterials scienceMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Filtered tailings present many advantages over slurry tailings (e.g., stronger mechanical properties, lower risks of dam failure and easier reclamation) and are more and more considered as an alternative mine waste management approach for surface disposal. However, low degrees of saturation also expose filtered tailings to oxidation and to the risk of acid mine drainage (AMD) generation. In this study, codisposal approaches were studied as a solution to control reactive filtered tailings geochemical behavior. Two different types of tailings were considered: very reactive and AMD generating tailings, and reactive tailings yet with a significant natural buffering capacity. Laboratory kinetics tests were used to calibrate and validate numerical reactive transport simulations which were then extrapolated to evaluate various codisposal scenarios (including mixing tailings or disposing them of in successive layers) for more realistic conditions. Results confirmed that the deposition of filtered reactive tailings and their exposition to atmospheric conditions would lead to the rapid generation of AMD. The main factor controlling critical time (i.e., the time before pH becomes acidic) was the neutralization capacity and carbonate content of the tailings. Consequently, mixing reactive tailings with tailings having a greater buffering capacity would contribute to significantly increase the critical time and therefore the time tailings can be left exposed before AMD generation starts. Disposing new layers of mixed layers at a frequency shorter than the critical time would contribute to efficiently prevent AMD generation during deposition. If the critical time had to be slightly excessed, the remaining buffering capacity of underlying layers could contribute to neutralize the acid produced before the contamination front reaches the groundwater table. Simulations showed, however, that the most efficient strategy to prevent AMD generation would be to regularly dispose of reactive tailings, directly covered by a layer of tailings with a significant buffering capacity. The top layer would remain around neutrality and protect the underlying reactive layer from oxidation, thus efficiently preventing AMD generation until reclamation.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.305
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