MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377820831 · doi:10.1080/00084433.2023.2215013

Spectroscopic characterisation of feedstock for copper smelters by machine-learning

2023· article· en· W4377820831 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Bernicky, Boyd Davis, Jack A. Barnes, Hans‐Peter Loock

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaQueen's University
FundersFamily Process InstituteHistorical Metallurgy SocietyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKingston University
KeywordsRaw materialCopperElemental analysisSmeltingMineralAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MetallurgyMaterials scienceChemistryMineralogyEnvironmental chemistryInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A flame-emission spectrometer was built to determine the elemental composition of powdered minerals that are important in copper smelting processes. The feedstock, consisting of milled concentrate, was fed into an oxyacetylene flame without sample preparation. The elemental composition (Cu, Fe, S, Si, and Zn) was determined by applying an artificial neural network (ANN) to a set of emission spectra obtained from Cu and Fe pure elemental powders, five pure mineral powders of known composition and 30 binary mixtures of these mineral samples. The ANN model was able to accurately predict the Cu and Fe content of these mineral powders within better than 2% of the value obtained from ICP-OES. The analysis was repeated on 12 industrial samples with well-known compositions. Spectra from these samples were analyzed both in isolation of the reference minerals and together with the reference minerals, giving similar results.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0060.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207