Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Validation study demonstrates noise-robust coal-gangue identification using bidirectional state-space models and roughness cues, indicating potential for automated underground mining.
Acoustic-vibration coal-gangue recognition is required for intelligent top-coal caving, but non-stationary underground equipment noise can induce distribution shifts between calibration and operating conditions. This paper formulates the task as a noise-scenario generalization problem and proposes RAAF-BiPAC-Mamba, a roughness-guided bidirectional Mamba framework for noise-robust recognition. The framework uses an efficient bidirectional selective state-space backbone to encode 2048-point acoustic-vibration impact responses and introduces two robustness mechanisms. Roughness-aware adaptive fusion (RAAF) uses latent vibration roughness as a modality-reliability cue, whereas the physics-aware constraint with gradient reversal (PAC-GRL) combines gradient-reversal alignment with a label-conditioned, one-sided roughness regularizer. The method is evaluated on a controlled-platform dataset under source-event-disjoint validation, leave-one-noise-scenario-out (LONSO) evaluation, and synthetic held-out equipment-noise overlay testing. Under the primary source-event-disjoint protocol, RAAF-BiPAC-Mamba achieves 93.74% average accuracy across seven noise scenarios and 91.18% under severe mixed noise (S6), improving over Bi-Mamba by +3.25 and +3.75 percentage points and over the adapted HMBCNN-style implementation by +4.00 and +4.20 percentage points, respectively. It also obtains 89.54% Avg-LONSO accuracy and 86.00% accuracy in the held-out mixed-equipment overlay at −6 dB, while using 0.234 M parameters and 0.063 G FLOPs. These results support noise-shift robustness under the evaluated controlled-platform and held-out noise-overlay settings; they do not establish transfer across mine sites, sensor hardware or calibration, geological conditions, or installation configurations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: