MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403227205 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i2.2889

Manufacturing Industry: A Sustainability Perspective On Cloud And Edge Computing

2023· article· en· W4403227205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S.P. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingSustainabilityPerspective (graphical)Cloud manufacturingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionIndustry 4.0BusinessIndustrial organizationComputer scienceTelecommunicationsOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem is investigated through an analysis of the industrial use cases and sustainability of cloud and edge computing technologies.The study is carried out as a review of the literature, and industry-published materials are also employed to comprehend the demands of the market for these technologies.The findings suggest that manufacturing may achieve notable sustainability gains by leveraging cloud and edge computing for data analysis, automation, and cross-organizational cooperation.These consist of enhanced productivity, safety, quality, flexibility, and scalability as well as increased resource and energy efficiency.It is also possible to save costs and decrease waste and downtime.Studies indicate that cloud computing is a more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly option than localized servers.When opposed to centralized data centers, edge computing solutions provide reduced latency.Additionally, edge computing lowers expenses and energy usage by minimizing the quantity of data that has to be sent.The decentralization of cloud centre provides low-latency computing capabilities.This makes it possible to host latencysensitive apps that need more processing power than edge devices can provide.Furthermore, for non-compute-intensive application and centre can result in considerable energy and cost reductions.Applications requiring high computational latency and tolerance should be housed in bigger, centralized data centers with more processing power and energy efficiency.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207