Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern life would not exist without semiconductors because all electronic components used in computers, telecommunications, health care, transportation, and energy systems are equipped with chips. To examine both backward and forward activities in semiconductor industry, this paper formulates the industry as a closed-loop supply chain. It articulates how old semiconductors are processed and recycled to manufacture new silicon and chips, and examines the impact of a commonly applied subsidy scheme on the performance of semiconductor firms which operate in upstream and downstream layers of the industry. Specifically, the proposed semiconductor supply chain involves (i) a return function sensitive to monetary payments; (ii) a subsidy legislation rewarding end-users for recycling; (iii) upstream industry where silicon is produced using virgin and scrap materials; (iv) downstream industry in which semiconductor manufacturers (such as TSMC, Samsung, Intel) buy silicon and other materials, hire workers, and then produce and sell chips. We characterize Stackelberg equilibrium silicon and semiconductor prices and outputs and calibrate model parameters using actual data to quantify the effects of subsidy and collection channels on silicon and semiconductor firms’ performance. We find that the subsidy scheme neither distorts firms’ strategies nor causes any inefficiency for the semiconductor industry. It stimulates circular economy activities and provides economic and environmental benefits.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".