MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205800610 · doi:10.17975/sfj-2021-004

A comparative analysis of air pollution levels during times of international uncertainty: The financial crisis of 2008 and the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020

2021· article· en· W3205800610 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ammar Vora, Hillary Hale

Bibliographic record

VenueSTEM Fellowship Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCOVID-19 impact on air quality
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityChurchill Northern Studies Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecessionPandemicFinancial crisisAir pollutionUnemploymentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PovertyDevelopment economicsEconomicsChinaBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During a crisis, economies stagnate as uncertainty grows about the future state of the world. The financial crisis of 2008 led to a severe recession where the global economy halted for approximately two years, causing unemployment and poverty [1]. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which attacks the respiratory system [2], was first identified in Wuhan, China, in late December of 2019. Within a matter of months, it spread globally causing economies to shut down. As distinct as the financial crisis of 2008 may seem from the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns, both have had devastating effects on national economies and industrial production, resulting in an overall decrease in air pollutant emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NO x ). Therefore, parallels can be made between air pollution levels during each crisis. Given air pollution rates increased after the financial crisis of 2008 [3], it is likely air pollution will also rise in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to support this argument by analyzing air pollution trends outlined in the results of several published papers.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTEM Fellowship JournalSame topicCOVID-19 impact on air qualityFrench-language works237,207