MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798063754 · doi:10.1080/15567249.2018.1460422

Revisiting CO<sub>2</sub> emissions convergence in G18 countries

2018· article· en· W2798063754 on OpenAlex
Jiangpeng Lin, Roula Inglesi‐Lotz, Tsangyao Chang

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sources Part B Economics Planning and Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Education of Hebei Province
KeywordsUnit root testUnit rootPer capitaEconomicsConvergence (economics)Greenhouse gasQuantileUnit (ring theory)Development economicsEconometricsMacroeconomicsMathematicsCointegrationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study revisits whether CO2 emissions converge in G18 countries over the period of 1950–2013. To work on this empirical analysis, we employ a more powerful quantile unit root test with per capita CO2 emissions. While conventional unit root tests fail to reject convergence in CO2 emissions in these G18 countries, quantile unit root test results demonstrate CO2 emissions converged in 5 of these G18 countries (i.e., Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, and India). Our empirical results have important policy implications for the governments of G18 countries to direct efficient and effective energy policies to reduce the CO2 emissions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.213 · 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