A reinforcement learning approach for selecting infill drilling locations considering long-term production planning in mining complexes with supply uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simultaneous stochastic optimisation frameworks provide a method for optimising long-term production schedules in mining complexes that aim to maximise net present value and manage risk related to supply uncertainty. The uncertainty and local variability related to the quality and quantity of material in the mineral deposits are modelled with a set of stochastic orebody simulations, an input into the simultaneous stochastic optimisation framework. Infill drilling provides opportunities to collect additional information associated with the mineral deposits, which can inform future production scheduling decisions. A framework is developed for optimising infill drilling locations with a criterion that seeks areas that directly affect long-term planning decisions and requires the use of geostatistical simulations. Actor-critic reinforcement learning is applied to identify infill drilling locations in a copper mining complex using this criterion. The case study demonstrates that adapting production scheduling decisions given additional information has the potential to improve the associated production and financial forecasts and identifies a stable area for infill drilling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".