The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11053-021-09864-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring Deep Learning for Dig-Limit Optimization in Open-Pit Mines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The use of GA in various scientific fields remains very common. It's similar in mining, where GA is most commonly used for production and equipment scheduling optimisation [51][52][53], cut-off optimisation [54,55], and grade and quality control [56,57].…”
Section: Genetic Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of GA in various scientific fields remains very common. It's similar in mining, where GA is most commonly used for production and equipment scheduling optimisation [51][52][53], cut-off optimisation [54,55], and grade and quality control [56,57].…”
Section: Genetic Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This tool was later used to evaluate the relationship between selectivity, equipment size and dig-limits definitions [Ruiseco and Kumral, 2017]. Williams et al [2021] propose a neural network to evaluate the dig-limits definition made by the genetic algorithm in order to improve the efficency of this approach. Vasylchuk and Deutsch [2019] tackle this problem with an iterative heuristic based on an initial classification using a fixed grid to maximize the expected profit, and additional steps to solve problematic locations related to operational restrictions.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently various researchers have developed algorithms to automate and optimize the dig limit delineation process, which rely on heuristics and metaheuristic algorithms. The techniques used include greedy algorithm-based methods (Richmond and Beasley, 2004;Vasylchuk and Deutsch, 2019), mixed integer programming (MIP) (Hmoud and Kumral, 2022;Nelis and Morales, 2021;Nelis, and Meunier, 2022;Sari and Kumral, 2017;Tabesh and Askari-Nasab, 2011), genetic algorithms (Ruiseco, 2016;Ruiseco, Williams, and Kumral, 2016;Ruiseco and Kumral, 2017;Williams et al, 2021), simulated annealing (Deutsch, 2017;Hanemaaijer, 2018;Isaaks, Treloar, and Elenbaas 2014;Kumral, 2013;Neufeld, Norrena, and Deutsch, 2003;Norrena and Deutsch, 2001), block aggregation by clustering (Salman et al, 2021) and convolutional neural networks (Williams et al, 2021), or a combination of techniques. With these algorithms, the definition of 'mineability' or 'digability' varied greatly between different investigators.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, their model adapted problematic locations by reconsidering the neighbouring blocks and their destinations and performed a hill climbing step to improve the solution iteratively. Williams et al (2021) recently explored GA solutions using a CNN to assess the dig limit cluster quality. The algorithm was very fast but could not well distinguish different clustering penalties (position-and-orientation-related).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%