MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132378534

LIBS mineralogy: quantitative mineralogy on the belt

2020· article· en· W7132378534 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
A. Blouin, D. Gagnon, J. El-Haddad, E. Soares de Lima Filho, F. Vanier, A. Harhira, P. Bouchard, F. Boismenu, A. Hamel, A. Beauchesne, C. Padioleau, T. Vaillancourt, A. Plugatyr, M. Sabsabi, G. J. Wilkie

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaser-induced breakdown spectroscopyMineral processingCharacterization (materials science)Base metalUnderpinningSample (material)Process (computing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative mineralogy is an established discipline in the geosciences and is aimed at providing mineral grade and texture information for geological and mineral processing applications. The two core technologies underpinning Quantitative Mineralogical Analysis (QMA) are Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) in combination with Energy-dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS). Technologies such as QEMSCAN and MLA are now routinely used to optimise the performance of large-scale mineral processing plants in the base and precious metal sectors. One of the major disadvantages of the QMA methods used today is extensive sample preparation requirements which make application of this technique to real-time mineralogical characterization not feasible. A breakthrough has been achieved by the National Research Council Canada in collaboration with CRC ORE by developing a novel Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) based technology capable of real-time mineralogical characterization of process streams without sample preparation. The potential applications of this technology include, but not limited to, in-pit muck piles, underground draw points, cross-belt analysis as well as slurries. This paper describes the development of the LIBS-based technology from a proof-of-concept (TRL2) to the construction of a prototype sensor and its validation in a simulated environment (TRL5). Future work is being planned to test and further validate the LIBS sensor on a mine-site which will progress the technology to its next readiness level TRL6).

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasmaFrench-language works237,207