MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903557676 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n12p18

Developing Environmentally Friendly Products from Rice Stumps for Community Economy

2018· article· en· W2903557676 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kingkarn Pijukkana, Sathit Laowattanaphong, Pracha Pijukkana

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLife Cycle Costing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of the Higher Education CommissionThailand Institute of Scientific and Technological Research
KeywordsEnvironmentally friendlyBusinessCosmetic industryEuropean unionEnvironmental impact assessmentEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryEngineeringCosmeticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research is a study and development of environmentally friendly products from rice stumps for community economy. The study was done by testing the coatings for heavy metals and volatile organic compounds to match with material choices with low environmental impacts. The author therefore chose 9 types of popular coatings which the community can easily obtain from the market. Testing was done in two parts: the first part was to find 7 heavy metals by using Thailand’s green label standard and standard criteria set by the European Union while the second part was to test for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and evaluate the environmental impacts in order to list materials and energy used by the products for their entire lifetime. Lastly, a survey was conducted using environmentally friendly products from rice stumps as models in order to investigate the perceptions in relation to manufacturing factors consistent with the manufacturers, the designers, as well as the perceptions of consumers. The study has found that rice stump coatings that passed the standard criteria are white shellac, gloss lacquer, wood preservatives, varnish and polyurethane respectively. It was found that manufacturers and designers had differing opinions in using low-impact materials and avoiding harmful materials while manufacturers, designers and consumers had statistically significant differing opinions in terms of the appropriate sizes and colors of products. In terms of product aesthetics, convenience of use, promotion of environmental friendliness, indication of natural manufacturing process and ease of elimination after the end of product lifetime, there were no differing opinions which were at a good level.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicLife Cycle Costing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207