Analysis and Prediction Model of Fuel Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emissions of Light-Duty Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the alarming rate of climate change, fuel consumption and emission estimates are critical in determining the effects of materials and stringent emission control strategies. In this research, an analytical and predictive study has been conducted using the Government of Canada dataset, containing 4973 light-duty vehicles observed from 2017 to 2021, delivering a comparative view of different brands and vehicle models by their fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions. Based on the findings of the statistical data analysis, this study makes evidence-based recommendations to both vehicle users and producers to reduce their environmental impacts. Additionally, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and various regression models have been built to estimate fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions for future vehicle designs. This study reveals that the Univariate Polynomial Regression model is the best model for predictions from one vehicle feature input, with up to 98.6% accuracy. Multiple Linear Regression and Multivariate Polynomial Regression are good models for predictions from multiple vehicle feature inputs, with approximately 75% accuracy. Convolutional Neural Network is also a promising method for prediction because of its stable and high accuracy of around 70%. The results contribute to the quantifying process of energy cost and air pollution caused by transportation, followed by proposing relevant recommendations for both vehicle users and producers. Future research should aim towards developing higher performance models and larger datasets for building APIs and applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".