MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigating the Efficiency of Microwave Treatment in Mine-to-Mill Operations: An Energy-Based Analysis

2024· preprint· en· W4391774836 on OpenAlexafffund
Adel Ahmadihosseini, Azlan Aslam, Ferri Hassani, Agus P. Sasmito

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsMillMicrowaveEnergy (signal processing)Process engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringWaste managementTelecommunicationsMechanical engineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mining is one of the most energy-intensive industries, accounting for almost 10 percent of worldwide energy consumption.This study investigates microwave treatment as a rock pre-conditioning method to improve energy efficiency in mine-to-mill operations.A novel energy-based data analysis is used to evaluate the application of the method, considering the input microwave energy and its corresponding effect on the mining processes.The results show that microwave treatment provides advantageous outcomes such as reducing the strength of rocks, specific crushing energy, field penetration index, and increasing cutter life cycle.The energy-based analysis emphasizes the significance of optimizing microwave power and exposure time as major design criteria.The results show that applying microwave energy can influence multiple mine-to-mill operations simultaneously, which exponentially improves the efficiency of the method.This understanding showcases the potential of microwave treatment in field applications, leading to more energy efficient and sustainable mining.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207