MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bilevel Optimization of Taxing Strategies for Carbon Emissions Using Fuzzy Random Matrix Generators

2021· book-chapter· en· W3211487905 on OpenAlexaff
T. Ganesan, Irraivan Elamvazuthi

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in human services and public health (AHSPH) book series · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStackelberg competitionBilevel optimizationMathematical optimizationFuzzy logicComputer scienceCuckoo searchCarbon taxOptimization problemEconomicsMathematicsMathematical economicsGreenhouse gasArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bilevel (BL) optimization of taxing strategies in consideration of carbon emissions was carried out in this work. The BL optimization problem was considered with two primary targets: (1) designing an optimal taxing strategy (imposed on power generation companies) and (2) developing optimal economic dispatch (ED) schema (by power generation companies) in response to tax rates. The resulting interaction was represented using Stackelberg game theory – where the novel fuzzy random matrix generators were used in tandem with the cuckoo search (CS) technique. Fuzzy random matrices were developed by modifying certain aspects of the original random matrix theory. The novel methodology was tailored for tackling complex optimization systems with intermediate complexity such as the application problem tackled in this work. Detailed performance and comparative analysis are also presented in this chapter.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in human services and public health (AHSPH) book seriesSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207