MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387224736 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/2325_38

Evolution of ground support designs for blasthole stoping in kimberlite at Diavik Diamond Mine

2023· article· en· W4387224736 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Burns

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Canadian institutionsRio Tinto (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStopingKimberliteDiamondMining engineeringUnderground mining (soft rock)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringWaste managementCoal miningMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diavik Diamond Mine has used blasthole stoping (BHS) for the extraction of ore from the A154N orebody since 2010. As the only diamond mine globally to use this mining method for kimberlite extraction, there are several unique challenges that Diavik had to overcome with regards to ground support. Geotechnical variability of the kimberlite, mine sequencing, stope sizing and production output requirements have led to the development of a variety of ground support designs to overcome these challenges. A change from a vertical walled, rectangular stoping geometry to a geometry requiring partial undercutting of the stope crown led to a transformation in the overcut ground support requirements. New support elements including, pre-tensioned cable bolts and resin rebar, have been integrated into the designs to account for the change in stope geometry. Concurrently, higher-capacity inflatable friction bolt support has been required to account for the geotechnical variability of the kimberlite and the transition from primary stoping to secondary stoping. This paper describes the various ground support designs at Diavik Diamond Mine used for BHS in kimberlite and how these designs have evolved over the life of the mine in response to changing ground conditions and production requirements.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical and Geomechanical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207