MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311040134 · doi:10.3390/su142315905

A Comprehensive Review on Construction Applications and Life Cycle Sustainability of Natural Fiber Biocomposites

2022· review· en· W4311040134 on OpenAlexafffund
Hammad Ahmad, Gyan Chhipi‐Shrestha, Kasun Hewage, Rehan Sadiq

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsLife-cycle assessmentSustainabilityConstruction industryNatural resourceBiocompositeEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental impact assessmentSustainable developmentEngineeringEnvironmental scienceConstruction engineeringBusinessMaterials scienceProduction (economics)EcologyEconomicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry is continuously searching for sustainable materials to combat the rapid depletion of global resources and ongoing ecological crises. Biocomposites have recently received global attention in various industries due to their renewability, low cost, and biodegradability. Biocomposites’ potential as a sustainable substitute in construction can be understood by identifying their diverse applications. Moreover, examining their life cycle environmental and economic impacts is important. Therefore, this study is a novel attempt to encompass biocomposites’ construction applications and their environmental life cycle performance. Statistical analysis is done related to the temporal distribution of papers, publishers, literature type and regions of studies. First, this paper reviews the latest research on the applications of natural fiber biocomposites in construction with their key findings. The applications include fiber reinforcements in concrete, external strengthening elements, internally filled hollow tubes, wood replacement boards, insulation, and non-structural members. The second part covers the life cycle assessment (LCA) and cost studies on biocomposites. The life cycle studies are currently rare and require more case-specific assessments; however, they highlight the benefits of biocomposites in cost savings and environmental protection. Finally, this study provides key suggestions for increasing the applicability of biocomposites as sustainable construction materials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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

Citations98
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207