Life cycle of ceramic waste materials from the perspective of revenue and environmental management
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production of ceramic creates scrap material that is often wasted. The aims of this study are to know the influence of size and material on scrap material and the role of accounting in managing the environment. The results show that product size and material used together have an effect on scrap material. Partial testing shows that only materials used have a positive and significant effect on the emergence of scrap materials. The accounting treatment is done by debiting Cash IDR 5,258,753.99 and crediting Work in Process-Raw Material Cost IDR 5,258,753.99. The cost of goods manufactured of ceramic products after accounting treatment for scrap material is lower than before. The selling price also decreased for the same product. The operating profit will increase IDR 5,013,038.64 (use original selling price) and decrease IDR 1,272,112.67 (use selling price after treatment for scrap material). The emergence of scrap material causes environmental problems. Environmental accounting overcomes this by removing scrap material from its place. The transfer is done by selling at a price of half the standard price. The proceeds from the sale are treated as a deduction from the cost of raw materials in an account in the Work in Process-Raw Materials Cost credit.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it