Maximizing Mining Operations: Unlocking the Crucial Role of Intelligent Fleet Management Systems in Surface Mining’s Value Chain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the one side, the operational expenses of mining enterprises are showing an upward trend; and on the other side, conventional mining fleet management systems (FMSs) are falling short in addressing the high-dimensionality, stochasticity, and autonomy needed in increasingly complex operations. These major drivers for change have convinced researchers to search for alternatives including artificial-intelligence-enabled algorithms recommended by Mining 4.0. The present study endeavors to scrutinize this transition from a business management point of view. In other words, a literature review is carried out to gain insight into the evolutionary trajectory of mining FMSs and the need for intelligent algorithms. Afterward, a holistic supply chain layout and then a detailed value chain diagram are depicted to meticulously inspect the effect of technological advancements on FMSs and subsequently the profit margin. The proposed value-chain diagram is advantageous in explaining the economic justification of such intelligent systems, illustratively, for shareholders in the industry. Moreover, it will show new research directions for mining scholars.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".