MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410197141 · doi:10.1016/j.dajour.2025.100583

An optimization-based approach to fleet reliability and allocation in open-pit mining

2025· article· en· W4410197141 on OpenAlexafffund
Sena Şenses, Mustafa Kumral

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Analytics Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Open-pit miningComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineeringMining engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open-pit mining operations depend heavily on the availability and reliability of complex equipment fleets, where the failure of one component can disrupt overall productivity. This study proposes two complementary optimization models to enhance fleet allocation and reliability in the mining industry. The first model — a Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming (MINLP) formulation — supports short-term planning by maximizing the minimum reliability of heterogeneous truck–shovel sub-systems under production and utilization constraints. The second model focuses on medium-term reliability enhancement, allocating targeted reliability improvements to critical components based on equipment degradation and operational history. Both models are validated using real operational data from an open pit mine , which includes failure and repair time datasets from 17 trucks and 2 hydraulic shovels. Reliability curves are estimated using the power law model under a Non-Homogeneous Poisson Process (NHPP) assumption. Results show that optimal allocation can achieve production targets of 4,489 tons per hour with a minimum sub-system reliability of 0.7. Furthermore, reliability improvements tailored to engine-hour-based cost functions can effectively restore operational performance over a one-week horizon. This research bridges the gap between fleet allocation and reliability allocation and introduces a novel framework for integrating reliability into equipment planning. The models provide actionable insights for mining operations to optimize equipment deployment, reduce failure risk, and support more resilient and cost-effective planning.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Analytics JournalSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207