MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387261149 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/2315_031

Conversion of an evapotranspiration soil cover to a geosynthetic cover for a waste rock facility closure

2023· article· en· W4387261149 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Peter Yuan, Guosheng Zhan, Alan J. Jones, Russel Hufford

Bibliographic record

VenueMine closure · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBarrick Gold Corporation
KeywordsCover (algebra)EvapotranspirationClosure (psychology)Environmental scienceSoil coverGeotechnical engineeringGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Soil waterSoil scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earthen water balance covers (e.g., ET covers) are used widely throughout the world to minimize or eliminate meteoric percolation through mine waste facilities. ET covers promote sustainability because they are constructed with natural materials generally available on or near a mine site, and function harmoniously with local hydrological processes. However, percolation from ET covers varies widely, and is dependent on total annual precipitation and precipitation occurrence (rain or snow). At semiarid and arid sites having low annual precipitation, percolation rates through ET covers are typically negligible (i.e., less than 5 mm/yr). In contrast, at humid sites with high annual precipitation, percolation rates can be high (i.e., greater than 100 mm/yr). In 2002, an ET cover was constructed on a waste rock facility (WRF) at Rain Mine in northern Nevada. The WRF is located at high altitude (2,020 m above mean sea level) where annual precipitation, primarily in the form of snow, is estimated at 442 mm. Mature vegetation was established by 2011 and estimated percolation through the WRF was about 12% of annual average precipitation (2011–2019). The high percolation rate from the WRF occurs because accumulated snow is difficult to manage with an ET cover in a snowmelt hydrology setting. To achieve low percolation rates, a geosynthetic cover is required. This paper presents a case study, where parts of an existing ET cover are replaced with a geomembrane that is overlain by a geocomposite drainage layer. Existing ET cover soils were salvaged, and then placed on top of the geosynthetic cover. The geosynthetic cover system was constructed on the part of the WRF that receives most of wind-drifted snowfall deposits. This case study summarizes a performance evaluation of the ET soil cover, characterization data collected, and geotechnical analyses performed in support of the new cover design. Construction experience learned from the execution of the project and performance data of the new cover system collected to date are also presented. Preliminary results indicate that the seepage rate from the WRF has been significantly reduced after the new cover installation.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 venueMine closureSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207