Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-laminated timber (CLT) is a large prefabricated solid engineering plank made of multiple layers of planks glued together and it is primarily used in structures such as the floors, walls, and roofs of buildings. ANSI/APA PRG 320 is the world recognized CLT lumber production standard, and the main raw material of CLT has always been softwood rather than hardwood. However, the bending strength, compressive strength, and shear strength of hardwood CLT lumber are stronger than softwood CLT lumber. The large and underutilized hardwood resources in central and southern Ontario provide a huge resource advantage for the hardwood CLT project. This article uses the Cost-Benefit Assessments model to assess the feasibility of investing in hardwood CLT plants in central and southern Ontario. The results show that the payback period of the hardwood CLT factory is 5 years, and the rate of return on investment of 10 years, 15 years, and 20 years are all-around 11%. This study could strengthen investor confidence and it also identifies the direction for the development of hardwood CLT plants in central and southern Ontario.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".