MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113225317 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2020.11.019

Measuring challenges in adoption of sustainable environmental technologies in Indian cement industry

2020· article· en· W3113225317 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vineet Chouhan, Raj Bahadur Sharma, Shubham Goswami, Abdul Wahid Ahmed Hashed

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmerging technologiesBusinessSustainabilityEnvironmental technologyEnvironmental pollutionUsabilityEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental planningSustainable developmentEnvironmental impact assessmentEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indian cement industry has adopted various environmental protection technologies, but adoption of these new environmental technologies and development of working model could not resolve many issues related to environmental concern among Stakeholders. This paper examined the current technologies used by the cement companies and the challenges they are facing in adoption of these technologies. This research describes the effects of cement manufacturing on global warming, water, coal and other pollution emissions during cement production process and involves environmental manufacturing technologies. The study measures the challenges of introducing environmental technologies by creating a model of challenges. including challenges in perceived usability of technology, challenges in perceived utility, challenges in user engagement, and challenges in intent to use behaviour. The study examines the challenges of introducing environmental technologies into the Indian cement industry to mitigate air, water, and energy pollution and to highlight the new environmental technologies and development of the model. The data from 1540 professionals responsible for using the environmental technology were gathered and analysed with t test and regression analysis. The final outcome of the research is the model expressing the challenges in adoption of environmental technologies in India.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · 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
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207