MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402285917 · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-34679-8

Improving the re-use potential of reactive waste rock using sieving: a laboratory geochemical study

2024· article· en· W4402285917 on OpenAlexafffund
Karine Sylvain, Thomas Pabst, Isabelle Demers

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsSulfide mineralsAcid mine drainageWeatheringSulfideEnvironmental scienceParticle sizeEnvironmental chemistryMineralogyGeologyWaste managementChemistryPyriteGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stockpiles containing sulfide minerals are subject to oxidation reactions when exposed to atmospheric conditions, which can result in the formation of acid mine drainage (AMD). Reactive waste rock has limited re-use potential due to the contamination risk associated with the generated drainage water. The re-use of reactive waste rock could lead to a significant reduction in the volume of waste rock as it mitigates the environmental impact of mine waste deposition. Acid mine drainage generation rate depends on sulfide weathering kinetics which are controlled by many parameters such as the mineralogy and the particle size. Fine fractions of waste rock have higher specific surface areas and degree of liberation of sulfides, resulting in greater reactivity than the coarse fractions. The objective of this research was therefore to evaluate the potential of re-use by controlling particle size using the sieving method. Two different potentially acid-generating waste rocks were divided into six fractions and subjected to both static and kinetic tests. Prediction of the geochemical behavior using static test did not consider the liberation of the minerals, and the long-term prediction was therefore overestimated. Results of the kinetic columns showed there was less oxidation of the sulfide minerals in the coarse fractions than in the fine fractions. Additionally, the distribution of sulfidic minerals and neutralizing minerals with particle size is influencing the potential of the re-use of the reactive waste rock.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207