Economic Evaluation of Environment-Friendly Streetlights on a University Campus: Using a Field Survey in Korea
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, most illumination sources for streetlights use high intensity discharge (HID) lamps. Global concerns have been raised regarding the amount of atmospheric CO2 released due to the power consumption of HID lamps. Thus streetlights with LED and solar-energy were analyzed competitively, to evaluate the feasibility of streetlights based on environmentally-friendly products at K University. The results showed that the adoption of a LED based streetlight system and a solar-energy LED system could potentially reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 120 and 170 tons each year, respectively. While the initial investment cost of LED is higher than HID, the maintenance cost is approximately one quarter of the maintenance cost of HID. However solar-energy LED lights are not appropriate to replace campus lights because of the significantly higher cost. Since the invention of LED, the technology has been continually improving while the prices are quickly decreasing; therefore, the break-even point of investments in environmentally-friendly lights is expected to be reached much earlier than previously anticipated.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it