LEGISLACIÓN COLOMBIANA DE CIERRE DE MINAS. ¿ES REALMENTE NECESARIA?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mine closure is an strategic component of any mining project. Today is inadmissible a project that does not provide from its conception, all technical, political, social and economic aspects on the progressive closure or end of the mining. Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Peru, among other countries, have ordered their legislation as a strategy for mining. In Colombia there is a scattered legislation that in practice involves all subjects, among them are: soil, air, discharges, and emissions. The Colombian Constitution, laws, acts-laws, acts and resolutions regulate aspects that, according to the authors' analysis, involving the different aspects of mine closure, so that would not be necessary to issue specific legislation for this subject, unlike countries such as Chile and Peru; similarly, do not require a law on opening mines. It would be advisable that the Ministry of Mines and Energy Mining prepare a fourth Guide (of three existing, whose preparation was the joint responsibility of the Ministry of Mines and Energy, and the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development) on the different legal provisions governing for closure of mines, and reinforce guarantees and monitoring program on the long-term.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it