Evaluation of Factors Affecting Vehicle Emission Compliance Using Regional Inspection and Maintenance Program Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">In-use vehicle regional inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs in the United States (US) and Canada generate a tremendous volume of data that provides a means for evaluating vehicle emissions compliance in actual consumer use. In this study, IM240 test data for several 1996 to 2001 vehicle models are analyzed from different regional programs in the US and Canada to confirm the suitability of using these data for evaluation of vehicles equipped with advanced emission control technology and to examine the various potential factors responsible for emissions noncompliance. Relative comparisons between US and Canadian program data are made for vehicle models used in the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) MMT® Test Program to examine the potential impact of differences in fuel properties on consumer experience and vehicle compliance. The compliance rate during IM240 testing is additionally examined for a number of 2000 and 2001 models that were certified by EPA with emissions levels equal to or less than Tier 2 Bin 5 standards. The totality of these analyses demonstrate the continued compatibility of the gasoline additive MMT® in consumer or in-use vehicles equipped with advanced emission control technologies.</div>
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".