MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223454220 · doi:10.1155/2022/2908447

Evaluation of Low-Carbon Scientific and Technological Innovation-Economy-Environment of High Energy-Consuming Industries

2022· article· en· W4223454220 on OpenAlexaff
Zhao Zhao, Zheng Liu, Tianqi Peng, Lingling Li, Yuanjun Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersMinistry of Public Security of the People's Republic of ChinaJilin Office of Philosophy and Social ScienceScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality
KeywordsTechnological changeBusinessIndustrial organizationInvestment (military)Consumption (sociology)Sustainable developmentTechnological innovation systemLow-carbon economyEnvironmental economicsValue (mathematics)Economic systemEnergy consumptionEconomyEconomicsChinaNatural resource economicsInnovation systemEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coordination of scientific and technological innovation with economy and environment is conducive to the sustainable development of high energy-consuming industries. Under the background of realizing the “carbon peak and neutrality” goal in China, this paper constructs the evaluation index system of scientific and technological innovation, economy, and environment of high energy-consuming industries. Based on the coupling coordination theory, this paper analyzes the coordinated development of scientific and technological innovation, economy, and environment of high energy-consuming industries from 2011 to 2019 and analyzes the factors restricting the coordinated development of the three systems. The results show that with the emphasis on scientific and technological innovation and ecological environment, the coordination degree of the complex system of scientific and technological innovation, economy, and environment of high energy-consuming industries is gradually increasing. R & D investment, the proportion of total industrial output value in GDP, and coal consumption per 10000 yuan of industrial output value are the main influencing factors of the coordination of the three systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of SensorsSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207