MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404284474 · doi:10.3390/su16229769

Sustainability in Long-Term Surface Mine Planning: A Systematic Review of Operations Research Applications

2024· review· en· W4404284474 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehri Aghdamigargari, Sylvester Avane, Angelina Anani, Sefiu O. Adewuyi

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityTerm (time)Systematic reviewEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringPolitical scienceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mining industry, critical for global resource supply, has historically been linked to significant environmental degradation and social challenges, including habitat disruption, water and soil contamination, as well as fatalities. But recently, the industry has been undergoing a transformative change to meet evolving environmental and societal expectations. Operations Research (OR) provides essential tools and techniques to optimize decision-making processes in this context. This paper presents a comprehensive review of different OR methods and their applications in balancing economic, social, and environmental objectives in surface mine planning. Of the 63 papers reviewed, 45 were published by researchers from three main countries: Canada, the United States, and Australia, with 73% of these papers appearing in journals. This review highlighted that linear programming (LP), dynamic programming (DP), Lagrangian relaxation (LR), stochastic programming, and metaheuristics are among the most widely applied methods in surface mine planning within a sustainable development (SD) context. By evaluating the strengths and limitations of these techniques, this review offers valuable insights for researchers and practitioners aiming to improve production efficiency and sustainability through advanced planning strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207