In the context of planning the exploitation of an open-pit mine, the final pit limit problem consists of finding the volume to be extracted so that it maximizes the total profit of exploitation subject to overall slope angles to keep pit walls stable. To address this problem, the ore deposit is discretized as a block model, and efficient algorithms are used to find the optimal final pit. However, this methodology assumes a deterministic scenario, i.e., it does not consider that information, such as ore grades, is subject to several sources of uncertainty. This paper presents a model based on stochastic programming, seeking a balance between conflicting objectives: on the one hand, it maximizes the expected value of the open-pit mining business and simultaneously minimizes the risk of losses, measured as conditional value at risk, associated with the uncertainty in the estimation of the mineral content found in the deposit, which is characterized by a set of conditional simulations. This allows generating a set of optimal solutions in the expected return vs. risk space, forming the Pareto front or efficient frontier of final pit alternatives under geological uncertainty. In addition, some criteria are proposed that can be used by the decision maker of the mining company to choose which final pit best fits the return/risk trade off according to its objectives. This methodology was applied on a real case study, making a comparison with other proposals in the literature. The results show that our proposal better manages the relationship in controlling the risk of suffering economic losses without renouncing high expected profit.

The strategic planning of open pit operations defines the best strategy for extraction of the mineral deposit to maximize the net present value. The process of strategic planning must deal with several sources of uncertainty; therefore, many authors have proposed models to incorporate it at each of its stages: Computation of the ultimate pit, optimization of pushbacks, and production scheduling. However, most works address it at each level independently, with few aiming at the whole process. In this work, we propose a methodology based on new mathematical optimization models and the application of conditional simulation of the deposit for addressing the geological uncertainty at all stages. We test the method in a real case study and evaluate whether incorporating uncertainty increases the quality of the solutions. Moreover, we benefit from our integrated framework to evaluate the relative impact of uncertainty at each stage. This could be used by decision-makers as a guide for detecting risks and focusing efforts.

Determining a set of nested pits to support the design of an open pit mine that leads to high economic value is crucial for the strategic planning of these operations; thus, practitioners rely on optimization methods for finding high‐value solutions. However, current approaches are not sufficient as they lack at least one of the following features: fast computations of optimal solutions, good geometric properties, and nestedness of the pits. In this work, we propose an optimization model to address the problem of determining multiple nested pits by introducing a cost‐based penalty for not meeting precedence constraints linked to a minimum bottom width. Using penalties instead of constraints is novel and turns out to have several advantages. First, the constraint matrix is totally unimodular; thus, the problem can be solved efficiently. Second, the model can be parameterized to generate nested pits. Therefore, our model is the first published model that is efficient, can be solved to optimality, preserves the nestedness of the solutions, and produces geometries more amenable for mine design, without the need for heuristics. Finally, we devise an iterative method that profits from the nestedness of the solutions to speed up the resolution and test the model in three different data sets, with different geometrical and cost parameters for a total of 135 different instances. The results show that the geometry of the bottom pits is indeed improved and that we can solve the problems up to optimality up to 80% faster than an off‐the‐shelf solver.