A Study on Relationship between CO2 Emissions and Economic Development in China Based on Dematerialization Theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the relationship between economic development and the factors causing the environmental pressures is the basic premise of formulating and adjusting the environmental policy. A sound environmental policy should be effective to reduce or mitigate the environment pressures and simultaneously maintain economic development. According to the theory of dematerialization, which is a method to describe the relationship between economic growth and the environment pressures, we divide target research stage (1960-2008) into 5 sub-time periods, that is 1960-1969, 1970-1979, 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2008, then inspect the relationship among GDP per capita, carbon emissions and intensity of carbon emissions in China. We find that absolute dematerialization occurs in 1960-1969, materialization occurs in 1970-1979, relative dematerialization occurs in 1980-1989, 1990-1999 and 2000-2008. On terms of the whole study period, relative dematerialization is occurring; from 1960 to 2008, when economic development changes 1%, carbon emissions, carbon emissions intensity and environmental pressures change 0.59%,-0.34% and 0.84% respectively, which shows that the relationship of environmental pressures and economic development, carbon emissions and economic development are relative decoupling.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it