MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386239293 · doi:10.3390/min13091129

Mineral Carbonation Potential (MCP) of Mine Waste Material: Derivation of an MCP Parameter

2023· article· en· W4386239293 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Jacobs, Michael Hitch, Sara Mosallanejad, Tejas Bhatelia, Jiajie Li, Faezeh Farhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser ValleyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesHebei Provincial Key Research ProjectsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCarbonationUltramafic rockMineralCalculatorEnvironmental scienceGeologyMining engineeringMineralogyGeochemistryComputer scienceEngineeringMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The heterogenous mineralogy of ultramafic deposits hosting mining operations makes it challenging to accurately determine the waste rock’s mineral carbonation potential (MCP). Additionally, the significantly higher carbonation capabilities of olivine than serpentine add to the difficulty. To address this issue, in this work, a new and unique tool called the MCP calculator was developed as a Microsoft ExcelTM spreadsheet to accurately determine the amount of anthropogenic CO2 that a given rock mass can sequester through mineral carbonation. The program estimates the modal mineral abundance of ultramafic rocks to aid in MCP estimation. This tool is designed to be cost-effective and tailored for use by the mining industry, utilising abundant lithogeochemical data to evaluate their deposit as a potential substrate for industrial mineral carbonation operations. The paper introduces the MCP calculator, outlines a framework for developing the MCP parameter, and presents an example of its application. The calculator is specific to the mineral assemblage investigated at the Turnagain ultramafic complex in northern British Columbia but can be adjusted to study comparable deposits. The paper acknowledges that using waste rock in a mineral carbonation operation requires economic and practical decisions beyond the scope of the research.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207