MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888301948 · doi:10.5539/jms.v8n3p36

A Field Survey on Social Responsibility Practices Carried Out by Textile Companies in Turkey Within the Scope of Sustainable Development

2018· article· en· W2888301948 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fatma Füsun Uysal, Emel Demir Askeroğlu, Bilge Berkhan Kastaci

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTextileBusinessScope (computer science)RestructuringSocial responsibilitySustainable developmentProcess (computing)DyeingPublic relationsMaterials scienceFinanceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable development is a process of change that involves institutional restructuring related with directing investments, positioning technological development and meeting the future needs as much as today’s needs. The application of environmental social responsibility studies is useful for any size of textile company. A primary concern for textile companies is the amount of water used in their processes. They generate large volumes of solid and hazardous wastes. Energy is the motor behind textile processes. Energy costs used in processes are important for especially large textile companies. While institutions are producing with social responsibility awareness, fulfilling their obligations to environment has gained importance in terms of sustainable development. The subject of this work introduces activities carried out by textile companies during production process, fulfilling their environmental responsibilities or not and which applications are done in the sector. Following the literature survey, a questionnaire study was conducted on textile firms operating in Turkey. From our research, it is concluded that some emerging technologies like enzymatic treatment in textile wet processing, ultrasonic treatment, electron-beam treatment, use of supercritical carbon dioxide in dyeing, electrochemical dyeing, ink-jet printing, plasma technology in textile wet processing are not used by any of companies.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207