MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898602073 · doi:10.3390/su10113873

Understanding the Evolution of Industrial Symbiosis with a System Dynamics Model: A Case Study of Hai Hua Industrial Symbiosis, China

2018· article· en· W2898602073 on OpenAlexaff
Hua Cui, Changhao Liu, Raymond P. Côté, Weifeng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Industrial Ecology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Development and Reform CommissionNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIndustrial symbiosisIndustrial ecologySymbiosisSystem dynamicsSustainable developmentBiochemical engineeringIndustrial wastewater treatmentField (mathematics)Energy consumptionChinaEcologyEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceSewage treatmentEnvironmental scienceEngineeringSustainabilityEconomicsEnvironmental engineeringBiologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial symbiosis (IS) is a key sub-field in industrial ecology. The field itself assists in developing strategies that support local and regional sustainable development. The evolution of IS is an important topic to be explored. In this paper, we use the system dynamics (SD) method to establish a model of the evolution of industrial symbiosis in the case of Hai Hua Industrial Symbiosis (HHIS). In this model, different scenarios for energy consumption, solid waste utilization, and wastewater utilization were set by changing the parameter values of certain input variables to analyze the evolution of HHIS. In addition, the drivers for IS evolution were investigated qualitatively in this study. The SD model was helpful for visualizing the effects and benefits of reducing the energy consumption, solid waste stock, and wastewater stock that were achieved by establishing symbiotic relationships during the evolution of IS. The results show that the optimization of energy and material flows and other symbiotic benefits can be achieved in HHIS. There are still some challenges that restrict the further evolution of HHIS. Some suggestions are proposed to promote its further evolution.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicSustainable Industrial EcologyFrench-language works237,207