MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000502290 · doi:10.2478/wsbjbf-2019-0022

Machine learning model development for predicting road transport GHG emissions in Canada

2019· article· en· W3000502290 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohd Jawad Ur Rehman Khan, Anjali Awasthi

Bibliographic record

VenueWSB Journal of Business and Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision treeArtificial neural networkGreenhouse gasMultilayer perceptronMultinomial logistic regressionMachine learningPerceptronBoosting (machine learning)Computer scienceGradient boostingRandom forestArtificial intelligencePredictive modellingLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prediction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is important to minimise their negative impact on climate change and global warming. In this article, we propose new models based on data mining and supervised machine learning algorithms (regression and classification) for predicting GHG emissions arising from passenger and freight road transport in Canada. Four models are investigated, namely, artificial neural network multilayer perceptron, multiple linear regression, multinomial logistic regression and decision tree models. From the results, it was found that artificial neural network multilayer perceptron model showed better predictive performance over other models. Ensemble technique (Bagging & Boosting) was applied on the developed multilayer perceptron model, which significantly improved the model’s predictive performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWSB Journal of Business and FinanceSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207