Awareness of the global sand crisis and sand substitutes in the construction industry in the United States and Canada: a stakeholder analysis
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 urgent call to address the global sand crisis has been sounded by the United Nations and environmental organizations, yet it is unclear whether this message has reached key stakeholders who are major consumers of sand and who make decisions about using sand or sustainable sand substitutes. The construction industry is by far the primary consumer of sand. Using a stakeholder framework, this study focuses on stakeholders in the US and Canadian construction industry. A survey completed by 378 respondents found very little familiarity with the sand crisis, sand substitutes in cement, or sand substitutes in building materials. No differences were found for decision makers purchasing sand and non-decision makers. As for roles, no differences were found among academics, architects, engineers, or managers except for familiarity with sand substitutes. Recommendations are offered to increase awareness of the sand crisis and encourage adoption of sustainable sand substitutes, and suggestions for further research are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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