When to invest in electric vehicles under dual credit policy: A real options approach
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
Abstract This research aims to investigate traditional vehicle manufacturers' green technology investment theory under dual credit policy from the perspective of real options, overcoming earlier investigations of this issue that considered it only from a stability or single uncertainty perspective. An analytical real options model was first provided for traditional automaker investment. Then we solved the analytical solution for the electric vehicle investment threshold based on the uncertainty of credit price and fuel vehicle market scenarios. The optimal electric vehicle investment timing is demonstrated using numerical simulation. Results show that (1) when the fuel vehicle market demand falls to a certain level, automakers will choose to make electric vehicle investments regardless of how the credit price changes in the market; (2) the effect of volatility on the investment threshold depends on the covariance or correlation coefficient; (3) the numerical simulation results revealed that the credit price drift rate, risk‐free rate, correlation parameters, and electric vehicle production cost all have a positive impact on the electric vehicle investment region, whereas the drift rate of fuel vehicle and electric vehicle production cost have a negative impact. These results can be used to make theoretical conclusions about electric vehicle investments.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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