MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405016874 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c05293

Byproduct-to-Host Ratios for Assessing the Accessibility of Mineral Resources

2024· article· en· W4405016874 on OpenAlexafffund
Titouan Greffe, Max Frenzel, Tim T. Werner, Gavin M. Mudd, Peng Wang, Manuele Margni, Cécile Bulle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersTotalHydro-QuébecSolvayMichelinL'Oreal USA
KeywordsHost (biology)Mineral resource classificationMineralBusinessEnvironmental scienceChemistryNatural resource economicsGeologyGeochemistryBiologyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mineral resources are essential for reaching net-zero ambitions by 2050. There is a rising diversity of metals in electricity generation and storage technologies, as well as for mobility technologies. However, little is known about the future supply of minor elements historically mined in low volumes such as indium, tellurium, germanium, or tantalum. Those minor elements are found in lower concentrations in the ores of major elements and therefore rarely form economic deposits on their own. Such elements are often produced as byproducts of a host (or "target commodity", which underpins the bulk of a mine's profitability) in ore, e.g., in porphyry ore, tellurium is a byproduct where copper is the host. As a result, the primary supply of those minor elements depends on the supply of the major elements. Such dependency has not been accounted for in scenarios of the mineral supply. To address this gap, we developed a methodology to harmonize scattered data of mineral resource estimates and to calculate the mass ratio between the byproduct and the host in ores and concentrates, called the byproduct-to-host (BtH) ratio. We collected crude ore tonnage and element grades, among other key data, from the state-of-the-art literature and publicly available mining company reports. Our data set covers 3422 deposits across 141 countries providing 22 275 BtH ratios. The future supply of minor elements can be derived by multiplying the primary production of host elements by the developed BtH ratios, noting the limitations of data representativity. The open-access nature of this work facilitates the enrichment and update of this data set in the coming years.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0190.021
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207