MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108385041 · doi:10.2760/176284

Real Driving Emissions Regulation: European Methodology to fine tune the EU Real Driving Emissions data evaluation method

2020· article· en· W3108385041 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alessandro Zardini, Bonnel Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueJoint Research Centre (European Commission) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEuropean unionEnvironmental scienceEmissions tradingEnvironmental economicsBusinessEconomicsInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This European Commission – JRC Technical Report presents a detailed analysis of a dataset made up of 11 passenger cars which have been emission tested during on-road trips for a total of 79 tests. The data set was mostly produced at JRC; except for 3 vehicles. In the framework of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the JRC supports DG-GROW (Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs) in order to develop an UNECE Regulation and a Global Technical Regulation (GTR) which should include real driving emissions (RDE) testing provisions for several extra-EU countries starting from Japan and South Korea and possibly including India, China, Canada and United States. As a preliminary input to the Global Real Driving informal working group at UNECE, this Report describes the latest EU-RDE procedure (RDE-4, Regulation EU 2018/1832) with focus on the response given by the RDE data analysis tool (EMROAD version 6.03, designed and maintained by JRC). The data set includes RDE tests expressily designed to cover extended boundary conditions (e.g. for temperature and altitude) and to challenge the requirements on trip dynamics which were laid down in the legislation to define the normal condition of vehicle use. EMROAD succesfully produced, and evaluated against requirements, the entire set of parameters defining the trip validity: trip duration, distance and distance shares, vehicle speed and speed shares, trip dynamics, ambient conditions, elevation gain, trip severity with respect to the WLTP driving cycle (based on CO2), emissions of pollutants and their correction for ambient boundary conditions and for excess of severity. The tool was also used to fine tune the tolerances around the CO2 characteristic curve, an useful feature when assessing the degree of test severity which is considered acceptable by the legislator in a specific country. In addition, EMROAD incorporates the previous RDE-3 package (Regulation EU 2017/1151) so that a comparison between the old and most recent provisions can be done. For instance, it was found that the data set was affected by the different methods used in RDE-3 and RDE-4 to build the moving averaging windows for the evaluation of overall trip dynamics: more RDE tests are valid with the latest RDE-4 method than with the older RDE-3.

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)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.284
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJoint Research Centre (European Commission)Same topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207