MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098990932

Tailings System Safety Review for the Quirke Tailings Management Area in Elliot Lake

2014· article· en· W7098990932 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Technology and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsNuclear decommissioningTailings damContainment (computer programming)Management system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rio Algom Limited’s Quirke Tailings Management Area in Elliot Lake contains 46 million tonnes of low-level radioactive, acid-generating tailings. Rehabilitation of the tailings area began soon after mining ceased in 1990. Since 1995, the 192 ha tailings area has been successfully flooded under a series of terraced cells. This provides a permanent water cover over the tailings to inhibit acid generation. The facility has been designed to safely contain the tailings for the long term with on-going maintenance provided to ensure that the containment structures continue to function as intended in accordance with the decommissioning plan. This paper describes a comprehensive tailings safety review for the facility along with the care, maintenance and surveillance program and discusses potential consequences associated with extreme disruptive events such as floods and earthquakes. The tailings safety review was broad based and focused on the performance of the tailings system as well as the individual structures. The intent of the review was to confirm that the facility had been designed, constructed and managed in accordance with acceptable standards. Where applicable, the review was based on Dam Safety Guidelines proposed by the Canadian Dam Association.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Technology and LearningFrench-language works237,207