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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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