MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229049305 · doi:10.3390/en15072384

Energy Efficiency and Industry 4.0 in Wood Industry: A Review and Comparison to Other Industries

2022· review· en· W4229049305 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Haddouche, Adrian Ilinca

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCategorizationEfficient energy useManufacturingEnergy consumptionFocus (optics)Tertiary sector of the economyComputer scienceEnergy (signal processing)Industrial organizationManufacturing engineeringEngineeringBusinessMarketingArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a literature review of recent research on introducing the Industry 4.0 approach to improving energy efficiency, especially in the wood industry. While researchers focus on processes, service, and customer concepts, the effect on energy consumption is less addressed in these studies and applications. This paper focuses on previous works that discuss how to apply Industry 4.0 concepts to energy issues, such as to achieve better efficiency and performance for the industry in general and the wood industry in particular. The complexity of the study requires a multistep development. First, we define each concept separately and the relationships between them. Second, we apply a search algorithm to find related articles with specific terms, and then use the PRISMA method to select the most important ones, eliminating duplicates and excluding articles that do not mention energy efficiency and Industry 4.0 in the manufacturing or wood industry. Third, we explain and categorize the results and consolidate the study with brief examples from other industries. Finally, we conclude the study by mentioning the limitations and perspectives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207