MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W191774122

Domestic Wood Products Manufacturing Trends and Factors to Enhance Competitiveness

2003· article· en· W191774122 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Urs Buehlmann, Matthew Bumgardner, Albert T. Schuler, Rich Christianson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetallurgy and Material Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessSpeculationWood industryDistribution (mathematics)ManufacturingDomestic marketManufacturing sectorMarketingIndustrial organizationCommerceInternational tradeEconomicsGeographyFinanceInternational economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

manufacturers to close domestic plants and substitute components or complete lines of furniture with imported products. Today, we conservatively estimate that approximately 40 percent of all wood residential furniture sold in the United States is imported from foreign countries. Foreign manufacturers, led by China, Canada and Italy, have nearly doubled their share of the U.S. wood household furniture market since 1990 [1]. While the impact on the U.S. wood home furniture market has been most pronounced, imports have also increased their share of market for wood office furniture, kitchen cabinets, and upholstered furniture [1,2]. Reasons for domestic market share losses include increasing globalization exposing companies previously sheltered from international competition, improvements in containerized

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetallurgy and Material ScienceFrench-language works237,207