Influential Nodes Identification in the Air Pollution Spatial Correlation Weighted Networks and Collaborative Governance: Taking China’s Three Urban Agglomerations as Examples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, driven by green and low-carbon development, accelerating the innovation of joint prevention and control system of air pollution and collaborating to reduce greenhouse gases has become the focus of China's air pollution prevention and control during the "Fourteenth Five-Year Plan" period (2021-2025). In this paper, the air quality index (AQI) data of 48 cities in three major urban agglomerations of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, Pearl River Delta and Yangtze River Delta, were selected as samples. Firstly, the air pollution spatial correlation weighted networks of three urban agglomerations are constructed and the overall characteristics of the networks are analyzed. Secondly, an influential nodes identification method, local-and-global-influence for weighted network (W_LGI), is proposed to identify the influential cities in relatively central positions in the networks. Then, the study area is further focused to include influential cities. This paper builds the air pollution spatial correlation weighted network within an influential city to excavate influential nodes in the city network. It is found that these influential nodes are most closely associated with the other nodes in terms of spatial pollution, and have a certain ability to transmit pollutants to the surrounding nodes. Finally, this paper puts forward policy suggestions for the prevention and control of air pollution from the perspective of the spatial linkage of air pollution. These will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of air pollution prevention and control, jointly achieve green development and help achieve the "carbon peak and carbon neutrality" goals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".