MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward a Machine Learning Approach to Predict the CO<sub>2</sub> Rating of Fuel-Consuming Vehicles in Canada

2022· article· en· W4323060108 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Suborno Deb Bappon, Ashim Dey, Shahriar Mahmud Sabuj, Annesha Das

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global warming is becoming a major concern for almost all countries nowadays. Burning fossil fuels, most of which by vehicles is the main cause of increasing toxic CO2in the air we breathe. Along with other factors, the emission of CO2from vehicles in the environment plays a major role in raising the temperature worldwide. Infrared energy of sunlight by the earth’s surface is absorbed by CO2and then re-emitted in all directions causing the greenhouse effect. So, it is very important to take necessary actions to identify high as well as low CO2emitting vehicles. The main aim of this work is to predict the CO2rating of the vehicle based on various key factors and identify the vehicle with CO2emissions beyond the ideal range. For that purpose, the last five years (2017-2021) fuel consumption rating dataset of Canada which is publicly available has been collected and analyzed first. Then, eight machine learning techniques were applied to predict the CO2rating based on the key features. From our investigation, we have found that the highest accuracy of 96% is achieved by the random forest algorithm. We hope that this work will contribute to the field of identifying and designing low CO2-emitting vehicles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207