MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494817694

The furniture industry in the United States and Canada

2008· article· en· W1494817694 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alessandra Tracogna, G. Barbiano di Belgiojoso

Bibliographic record

VenueCSIL reports · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessConsumption (sociology)Consumer spendingConsumer confidence indexCommercePersonal consumption expenditures price indexQuarter (Canadian coin)Financial crisisMarket economyEconomyEconomicsEconomic policyMarketingRecessionMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The US furniture market is facing a challenging period, with the mounting financial crisis and falling home sales. Moreover, growing unemployment is putting additional strain on consumer confidence. As such, a contraction of furniture demand is expected for 2008 and 2009. However, the USA remains the largest furniture consumer and importer worldwide, accounting for about one quarter of total world furniture consumption. In this respect, a number of analysts consider the current scenario to be a temporary one, with a likely recovery of the US economy in the medium-term. Indeed the US economy still has a strong foundation and the resources to overcome the crisis. The Canadian furniture industry can rely on worthy assets such as large wood availability, relatively low electricity costs and a long established expertise in furniture manufacturing. Yet the rapid growth of imports has turned Canada into a net importer of furniture in 2007. Nevertheless, today the country economy is facing a slowdown linked to the US scenario, with likely repercussions on the furniture market. As such, a stall in furniture demand is expected in the short run, with a recovery taking place in the medium term.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCSIL reportsSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207