Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seventh edition of the CSIL Research LEDs and the worldwide market for lighting fixtures is mainly based on over 300 interviews with manufacturers and retailers of lighting fixtures worldwide during the first half of 2016, plus statistical data and overall CSIL market knowledge in the lighting fixtures industry. The Report provides estimated data on consumption of total lighting fixtures and LED based lighting fixtures for the years 2010-2015 and forecasts for the years 2016-2020. A breakdown of LED lighting fixtures worldwide market is provided by country or geographical area (Western Europe, Central-Eastern Europe, Turkey, Russia and other CIS Countries, United States and Canada, Latin America, China, India, Japan, Asia and Pacific, Middle East, Africa) by segment (residential/consumer, commercial/architectural, industrial, outdoor lighting), by product (bulbs and retrofit lamps, modules, tubes and trunking systems, strip-linear lighting, floor and table luminaires, chandeliers and suspensions, downlights and recessed lighting, LED panels, spotlights and projectors, high bays, pole mounted, wall washers) and by application (Hospitality, Office, Retail, Industrial plants, Emergency, Healthcare, Architectural outdoor, Christmas, Streets, Galleries…). LED based lighting fixtures sales and related market shares are provided for the major companies operating in this market by considered countries. Short company profiles are also included. In the ranking there are both company using LEDs for some 15%-20% of their company turnover, and LED lighting specialists. For the first time, company market shares are given also for subsectors (office lighting, architectural outdoor lighting, emergency lighting…..). A section containing background technological information on LEDs is provided. An overview of OLED technology in the lighting fixtures market is included. Countries considered. Western Europe: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom (i.e. the European Union 15, less Luxembourg for which lighting fixtures data are listed together with those of Belgium) + Norway and Switzerland; Central-Eastern Europe: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia; Turkey; Russia and other CIS Countries: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine; North America: Canada and the United States; Latin America: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Venezuela; China; India; Japan; Asia and Pacific: Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam; Middle East: Bahrain, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates; Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, South Africa.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.110 | 0.023 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".