Applying Knowledge-Based and Data-Driven Methods to Improve Ore Grade Control of Blast Hole Drill Cuttings Using Hyperspectral Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study introduces a novel method utilizing hyperspectral imaging for instantaneous ore-waste analysis of drill cuttings. To implement this technique, we collected samples of drill cuttings at regular depth intervals from five blast holes in an open pit gold mine and subjected them to scanning using a hyperspectral imaging system. Subsequently, we employed two distinct methods for processing the hyperspectral images. A knowledge-based method was used to estimate ore grade within each sampled interval, and a data-driven technique was employed to distinguish the ore and waste for each sample interval. Firstly, leveraging the mixed mineralogical composition of the samples, the Linear Spectral Unmixing (LSU) technique was utilized to predict ore grade for each sample. Additionally, the Gradient Boosting Classifier (GBC) was used as an efficient data-driven approach to classify ore-waste samples. Both methods rendered accurate results when they were compared with results obtained through laboratory X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis and gold assay analysis for the same sample intervals. Adopting the proposed methodology in open pit mine operations can significantly enhance the process of grade control during blast hole drilling. This includes reducing costs, saving time, minimizing uncertainty in ore grade estimation, and establishing more precise ore-waste boundaries in resource block models.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".