Transitions between technological generations of alternative fuel vehicles in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transportation sector is responsible for nearly a quarter of greenhouse gases emissions (GHG); thus, incisive policies are necessary to mitigate the sector’s effect on climate change. Promoting alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) is an essential strategy to reduce GHG emissions in the short term. Here, we study the effects of governmental incentives on the diffusion of ethanol and flex-fuel vehicle technologies in Brazil. We use a multi-generation diffusion model which assumes that new technologies introduce fresh market potential for adopters as well as upgraders from established technologies. Our analysis indicates that tax rates affected the adoption of both gasoline and ethanol technology, but for flex vehicles, the effect of taxation is not significant. The effect of fuel price shocks during the 1990s meant that the introduction of ethanol technology made no significant impact on market potential and a negative word-of-mouth effect contributed to the technology’s failure. In contrast, the introduction of flex technology led to almost a doubling of total market potential. As policy suggestions, we emphasise the importance of tax reduction in addition to promoting versatile technologies, which insulate consumers against price fluctuations.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".