Lamp Design from Wasted Fabric in Garment Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Garment Industry is one of the industries that have dumped a large amount of wasted fabric at least 30-40 kg / month. Wasted fabrics are caused by the process of sewing, hydraulic pumping, and flaws on fabric. Those wastes were not being used for any further utilization. The current work investigated the use of Upcycling, a process to converse waste material to become a new product with higher quality and environmentally friendly value, as a conceptual model in the design process and examined its value for Upcycling product design by looking at a case study project. The concept from the Upcycling framework study was chosen for the investigation in order to evaluate a case study: a wasted fabric lamp. The findings suggest that Upcycling was helpful for improving and developing a wasted fabric lamp throughout the design process: including idea development, decision making, and implementation. Based on the evaluation of 3 design experts, it was found that a wasted fabric lamp is appropriate for using new materials or raw materials that do not cause problems for the environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".