MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407945992 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2025.01.275

Maintenance 4.0 in Mining Trucks: Data Digitalization and Advanced Protocols

2025· article· en· W4407945992 on OpenAlexafffund
Nour Elkhenin, Hatem Mrad

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceTruckData miningData scienceAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile mining equipment is essential but susceptible to costly failures. Despite the critical role of predictive maintenance in preventing such failures, existing research often lacks comprehensive frameworks that effectively integrate real-time telemetry data with advanced analytical tools to support decision-making in challenging mining environments. This study, conducted in collaboration with a mining partner, introduces a maintenance 4.0 approach utilizing telemetry data to enhance equipment maintenance and lifecycle management, with a focus on sustainable production. The methodology includes digitizing maintenance data and creating interactive dashboards with Power BI. Machine learning and statistical models enable real-time analysis of telemetry data to detect early failure signs, improving predictive maintenance. Integrating these technologies enhances equipment availability, optimizes maintenance costs, and improves operator health and safety. This approach promotes a digital, intelligent supply chain, fostering efficient and sustainable operations and enhancing the reliability of mining activities in challenging environments.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207