Interpretable AI-enabled decision support for drinking-straw substitution using per-use greenhouse-gas indicators and user-review evidence
解釈可能なAIを用いた、使い捨てストロー代替品選択のための意思決定支援:使用当たり温室効果ガス指標とユーザーレビューエビデンスの活用 (AI 翻訳)
Marwa S. Hassan, Shymaa Khamis, Ahmed Barakat, Randa M. Osman, Gassan Hodaifa, Jie Tang, Shaoshan Liu
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、飲料用ストロー代替品の選択を支援する解釈可能なAIベースの意思決定ワークフローを開発した。文献から得られた使用当たりGHG指標と、自然言語処理により抽出したオンラインレビューからのユーザー体験エビデンスを統合。5素材を比較した結果、シリコーンが全シナリオで最高評価を得た。
English
This study develops an interpretable AI-enabled decision-support workflow for drinking-straw substitution, integrating per-use GHG indicators from literature with user evidence from online reviews extracted via NLP. Silicone ranked highest across four scenarios due to low GHG and high user satisfaction, while Paper ranked lowest.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではプラスチック資源循環促進法により使い捨てプラスチック削減が進んでおり、本手法は企業が持続可能な代替品を選定する際の客観的根拠を提供する。特にScope3排出量削減に向けた購買判断に応用可能。
In the global GX context
This workflow offers a transparent, data-driven method for product substitution decisions combining environmental and user-experience data, relevant for companies facing single-use plastic regulations (e.g., EU SUP Directive) and seeking to reduce Scope 3 emissions.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Demonstrates integration of NLP-derived user evidence with GHG indicators in a transparent MCDA framework, useful for interpretable AI in sustainability decisions.
🏢実務担当者:Provides a replicable decision-support tool for sustainable procurement, using customer reviews and GHG data to evaluate product substitutes.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights how user-review evidence can complement environmental metrics in product regulation; may inform plastic reduction policies.
📄 Abstract(原文)
Abstract Plastic drinking straws are a visible single-use plastic product, yet selecting suitable substitutes remains challenging because literature-derived climate evidence and reported user experience are rarely evaluated together. This study develops and demonstrates an interpretable AI-enabled decision-support workflow that integrates literature-derived per-use greenhouse gas (GHG) indicators with review-derived user evidence extracted from online customer reviews using natural language processing (NLP). Drinking-straw alternatives were used as an information-rich case study. The integrated assessment combined a GHG-derived score, a user-experience feature score, and rating-based consumer approval within a transparent multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) under four predefined decision-priority scenarios. Among the five shortlisted materials and within the evaluated dataset, the selected per-use GHG assumptions, review-derived user evidence, normalization procedure, and scenario-specific weights resulted in Silicone achieving the highest integrated MCDA score across all four scenarios, whereas Paper ranked lowest. Silicone combined a low per-use GHG indicator with the highest user-experience feature score and high consumer approval. Paper had the highest per-use GHG indicator and a moderate user-experience feature score, while lexical analysis identified recurring functionality-related expressions in its reviews. A shallow decision tree identified a 0.081 kg CO₂e/use threshold separating Paper from the lower-per-use-GHG reusable alternatives within the evaluated decision matrix. The study is not a new process-based life-cycle assessment or comprehensive sustainability assessment. Instead, it demonstrates decision support limited to per-use GHG indicators and review-derived user evidence; broader sustainability dimensions were outside the scope. Future studies may adapt and evaluate the workflow for other product categories using product-appropriate environmental criteria and relevant user-derived evidence.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- crossref https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-63847-8first seen 2026-07-30 06:37:19
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録(無料・3キーワードまで)。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。