MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218464203 · doi:10.13073/fpj-d-15-00022

Prospects for Appearance Wood Products Ecodesign in the Context of Nonresidential Applications

2015· article· en· W2218464203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aline Cobut, Pierre Blanchet, Robert Beauregard

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Products Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcodesignContext (archaeology)Environmentally friendlyArchitectural engineeringDesign for the EnvironmentEngineeringSustainable developmentBusinessEnvironmental economicsProduct (mathematics)Manufacturing engineeringProduct designEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As environmental awareness grows, societal demand for more environmentally friendly products increases. Demand for environmental responsibility also reached the building material and construction sector. Green building has become more widespread over the past decade and can be considered a challenge for specifiers and building products manufacturers. Ecodesign, an application of the sustainable development concept, is one of the available tools to address this challenge. This article aims at proposing an ecodesign pathway for appearance wood products in the nonresidential building sector. Through extrapolating results from a previous interior wood door case study, it has been possible to obtain environmental profiles for the main segments of the appearance wood products family for nonresidential buildings. These profiles have allowed devising ecodesign solutions. Results show that for this whole family of products, raw materials are what cause the most environmental impacts, followed by shipping and end-of-life stages. Product component weight tends also to influence the environmental profile. Ecodesign solutions for composite-based products are strongly related to decreasing the composite component weight by design and remanufacturing. For solid wood–based products, ecodesign can be approached through remanufacturing or reclaiming, using locally certified sustainable wood. The use of hardwood waste may be available for energy purposes, but this may not be as relevant as reuse and recycle in the context of the province of Quebec energy grid mix.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForest Products JournalSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207