Sources and references

Standards and reference frameworks

1. Joint Ore Reserves Committee. (2012). Australasian code for reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves (The JORC Code, 2012 ed.). JORC of the AusIMM, AIG and Minerals Council of Australia.

   Supports: Resources and reserves reporting framework that consumes reconciliation evidence. Argus Mine does not classify resources.

   Open source

2. Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards. (2024). International reporting template for the public reporting of exploration targets, exploration results, mineral resources and mineral reserves (June 2024 update). CRIRSCO.

   Supports: International template from which JORC, NI 43-101 and equivalent codes derive.

   Open source

3. Canadian Securities Administrators. (2023). National Instrument 43-101 Standards of disclosure for mineral projects (unofficial consolidation, June 9, 2023). Ontario Securities Commission.

   Supports: Canadian disclosure standard for mineral projects, mentioned alongside JORC.

   Open source

4. AMIRA International. (2007). P754 Metal accounting: Code of practice and guidelines (Release 3, February 2007). AMIRA International.

   Supports: Metal accounting code for the plant. Context for the independent-measurement principle; it does not define the F1/F2/F3 factors. No public online version.

Technical literature

1. Parker, H. M. (2012). Reconciliation principles for the mining industry. Mining Technology, 121(3), 160–176.

   Supports: Classic formulation of the F1/F2/F3 factors and the requirement for independent data at each stage. Its F1 differs from Argus Mine's (see Methodology).

   Open source

2. Otto, T. J., & Musingwini, C. (2019). A spatial mine-to-plan compliance approach to improve alignment of short- and long-term mine planning at open pit mines. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 119(3), 253–259.

   Supports: Spatial mine-to-plan compliance: the concept Argus Mine's F1 measures.

   Open source

3. Fouet, T., Riske, R., Morley, C., Cook, A., Conti, D., & Centofanti, J. (2009). Standardising the reconciliation factors required in governance reporting. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Mining Geology Conference (pp. 127–140). The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

   Supports: How reconciliation factors are calculated varies between companies.

   Open source

4. Morley, C. (2003). Beyond reconciliation – A proactive approach to using mining data. In Proceedings of the Fifth Large Open Pit Mining Conference. The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

   Supports: Proactive reconciliation: using mining data to anticipate, not only to explain afterwards.

   Open source

5. Chieregati, A. C., Pignatari, L. E. C., Pitard, F. F., & Delboni Jr., H. (2019). Proactive reconciliation as a tool for integrating mining and milling operations. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 29(2), 239–244.

   Supports: Monthly reconciliation as common practice, and proactive reconciliation as a mine-to-mill integration tool.

   Open source

6. Macfarlane, A. S. (2015). Reconciliation along the mining value chain. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 115(8), 679–685.

   Supports: Area-by-area reconciliations are rarely integrated end to end; it proposes integrating them along the whole value chain.

   Open source

7. Marinin, M., Marinina, O., & Wolniak, R. (2021). Assessing of losses and dilution impact on the cost chain: Case study of gold ore deposits. Sustainability, 13(7), 3830.

   Supports: Modelled scenario: the effect of reducing losses and dilution on a gold deposit's cost chain.

   Open source

8. Xingwana, L. (2016). Monitoring ore loss and dilution for mine-to-mill integration in deep gold mines: A survey-based investigation. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 116(2), 149–160.

   Supports: Up to 30 days between the stope and the plant, measured with RFID in an underground gold mine in South Africa.

   Open source

9. Dominy, S. C., Glass, H. J., & Minnitt, R. C. A. (2022). Sampling broken ore residues in underground gold workings: Implications for reconciliation and lost revenue. Minerals, 12(6), 667.

   Supports: Tracking, sampling and stockpile management errors as causes of poor reconciliation.

   Open source

10. Power, D. P. (2010). The application of the AMIRA P754 metal accounting code in the coal industry. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 110(7), 347–349.

    Supports: Scope of AMIRA P754: the metallurgical process, without reconciling back to the reserve base.

    Open source

11. Maptek. (2024). Block reserves: General [Vulcan 2024.4 online help]. Maptek Pty Ltd.

    Supports: Full-cell or proportional block reserves: the two volumetric conventions.

    Open source

12. Datamine Software. (n.d.). TRIVAL process [Studio NPVS online help]. Datamine.

    Supports: Partial-block calculation as the standard option when intersecting a block model with surfaces.

    Open source

Satellite data and tools

1. Torres, R., Snoeij, P., Geudtner, D., Bibby, D., Davidson, M., Attema, E., Potin, P., Rommen, B., Floury, N., Brown, M., et al. (2012). GMES Sentinel-1 mission. Remote Sensing of Environment, 120, 9–24.

   Supports: The Copernicus Sentinel-1 radar mission.

   Open source

2. Berardino, P., Fornaro, G., Lanari, R., & Sansosti, E. (2002). A new algorithm for surface deformation monitoring based on small baseline differential SAR interferograms. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 40(11), 2375–2383.

   Supports: The SBAS (Small BAseline Subset) InSAR time-series method.

   Open source

3. Yunjun, Z., Fattahi, H., & Amelung, F. (2019). Small baseline InSAR time series analysis: Unwrapping error correction and noise reduction. Computers & Geosciences, 133, 104331.

   Supports: MintPy, the open-source software that runs the SBAS inversion.

   Open source

4. Casu, F., Manzo, M., & Lanari, R. (2006). A quantitative assessment of the SBAS algorithm performance for surface deformation retrieval from DInSAR data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 102(3–4), 195–210.

   Supports: Velocity precision in the order of millimeters per year in coherent areas with long time series.

   Open source

5. Cigna, F., Esquivel Ramírez, R., & Tapete, D. (2021). Accuracy of Sentinel-1 PSI and SBAS InSAR displacement velocities against GNSS and geodetic leveling monitoring data. Remote Sensing, 13(23), 4800.

   Supports: Real precision depends on ground coherence and series length; that is why active pits are complemented with ICESat-2.

   Open source

6. Neuenschwander, A. L., Pitts, K. L., Jelley, B. P., Robbins, J., Markel, J., Popescu, S. C., Nelson, R. F., Harding, D., Pederson, D., Klotz, B., & Sheridan, R. (2025). ATLAS/ICESat-2 L3A land and vegetation height (ATL08, Version 7) [Data set]. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center.

   Supports: NASA's ICESat-2 ATL08 laser altimetry product.

   Open source

7. Neuenschwander, A., & Pitts, K. (2019). The ATL08 land and vegetation product for the ICESat-2 Mission. Remote Sensing of Environment, 221, 247–259.

   Supports: Technical description of the ATL08 product.

   Open source

8. European Space Agency, & Airbus. (2022). Copernicus DEM [Data set]. European Space Agency.

   Supports: Global reference elevation model.

   Open source

9. Hogenson, K., Kristenson, H., Kennedy, J., Johnston, A., Rine, J., Logan, T., et al. (2020). Hybrid Pluggable Processing Pipeline (HyP3): A cloud-native infrastructure for generic processing of SAR data [Computer software]. Zenodo.

   Supports: Cloud processing of Sentinel-1 radar pairs (ASF HyP3).

   Open source

Our own measurements and illustrative examples

1. Argus Mine (2026). Full reconciliation of a demonstration mine.

   Supports: The figures under "Where we are today" on the About page (299 periods, 11 phases, a 1.28-million-block model). Our own measurement on demonstration data, not client data.

2. Argus Mine (2026). Centroid versus partial-block volumetrics on a demonstration phase.

   Supports: The figures on the Methodology page (150 blocks, 15% design growth, 20,449 t). Our own measurement on demonstration data, not client data.

3. “The longer you wait, the more value is exposed” chart (home page).

   Supports: Illustrative example of how exposure grows; not data from a real site.

4. Case and audit report on the home page.

   Supports: Scenario with example figures and a report generated on demonstration data, to show the product flow.

5. Exposure calculator on the home page.

   Supports: Arithmetic on the values the user enters; not a product projection.

Image credits

The photographs and satellite images on this site are real and in the public domain or free to use. Platform screenshots are from the running application, not mockups.

1. Mark Thomas (Pexels @tomo). Massive open pit mine with haul trucks [Photograph]. Pexels.

   Supports: Home cover: open-pit wall with haul trucks on the ramp. Pexels License, no attribution required.

   Open source

2. Earth Science and Remote Sensing Unit, NASA Johnson Space Center. (2009). Astronaut photograph ISS022-E-8276 [Photograph]. NASA.

   Supports: Capabilities background and Contact cover: Escondida pit, waste dumps and leach pads photographed from the International Space Station. Public domain.

   Open source

3. Earth Science and Remote Sensing Unit, NASA Johnson Space Center. (2009). Astronaut photograph ISS022-E-8260 [Photograph]. NASA.

   Supports: Platform cover: the Chuquicamata mining district from the International Space Station. Public domain.

   Open source

4. Ministerio de Minería, Gobierno de Chile. Visita a operación minera Collahuasi [Photograph]. Flickr (somosmineria), via Wikimedia Commons.

   Supports: Silos section background (Governance): flotation bay of the Collahuasi concentrator. Public Domain Mark.

   Open source

5. Ministerio de Minería, Gobierno de Chile. Visita a operación minera Collahuasi [Photograph]. Flickr (somosmineria), via Wikimedia Commons.

   Supports: Governance cover: grinding bay of the Collahuasi concentrator. Public Domain Mark.

   Open source

6. Ministerio de Minería, Gobierno de Chile. Inauguración de faena minera Pampa Camarones [Photograph]. Flickr (somosmineria), via Wikimedia Commons.

   Supports: Methodology cover and site sharing image: Pampa Camarones open pit, Arica y Parinacota, Chile. Public Domain Mark.

   Open source

7. CheukKai (Wikitravel Shared). Chuquicamata Panorama [Photograph]. Wikimedia Commons.

   Supports: About cover: panorama of the Chuquicamata pit from the lookout. Released to the public domain by the author.

   Open source

8. Noah Ridge (Unsplash @consoledotlog). A large open pit in the middle of a forest [Photograph]. Unsplash.

   Supports: Getting started cover: open pit with a spiral ramp photographed by drone. Unsplash License, no attribution required.

   Open source

9. NASA Earth Observatory image by Michala Garrison, using Landsat data from the U.S. Geological Survey. (2024). Copper mining at Chuquicamata.

   Supports: Sources cover: Chuquicamata in natural colour, Landsat 9, January 2024. Public domain.

   Open source