Optimal Ozone Reduction Policy Design Using Adjoint-Based NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> Marginal Damage Information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite substantial reductions in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions in the United States, the success of emission control programs in optimal ozone reduction is disputable because they do not consider the spatial and temporal differences in health and environmental damages caused by NOx emissions. This shortcoming in the current U.S. NOx control policy is explored, and various methodologies for identifying optimal NOx emission control strategies are evaluated. The proposed approach combines an optimization platform with an adjoint (or backward) sensitivity analysis model and is able to examine the environmental performance of the current cap-and-trade policy and two damage-based emissions-differentiated policies. Using the proposed methodology, a 2007 case study of 218 U.S. electricity generation units participating in the NOx trading program is examined. The results indicate that inclusion of damage information can significantly enhance public health performance of an economic instrument. The net benefit under the policy that minimizes the social cost (i.e., health costs plus abatement costs) is six times larger than that of an exchange rate cap-and-trade policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".