MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410356994 · doi:10.1145/3672608.3707870

A Circular Construction Product Ontology for End-of-Life Decision-Making

2025· article· en· W4410356994 on OpenAlexaff
Kwabena Adu-Duodu, Stanly Wilson, Yinhao Li, Aanuoluwapo Oladimeji, Talea Huraysi, Masoud Barati, Charith Perera, Ellis Solaiman, Omer Rana, Rajiv Ranjan, Tejal Shah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOntologyComputer scienceProduct (mathematics)Process managementKnowledge managementSystems engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient management of end-of-life (EoL) products is critical for advancing circularity in supply chains, particularly within the construction industry where EoL strategies are hindered by heterogenous lifecycle data and data silos. Current tools like Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) and Digital Product Passports (DPPs) are limited by their dependency on seamless data integration and interoperability which remain significant challenges. To address these, we present the Circular Construction Product Ontology (CCPO), an applied framework designed to overcome semantic and data heterogeneity challenges in EoL decision-making for construction products. CCPO standardises vocabulary and facilitates data integration across supply chain stakeholders enabling lifecycle assessments (LCA) and robust decision-making. By aggregating disparate data into a unified product provenance, CCPO enables automated EoL recommendations through customisable SWRL rules aligned with European standards and stakeholder-specific circularity SLAs, demonstrating its scalability and integration capabilities. The adopted circular product scenario depicts CCPO's application while competency question evaluations show its superior performance in generating accurate EoL suggestions highlighting its potential to greatly improve decision-making in circular supply chains and its applicability in real-world construction environments.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207