MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389640700 · doi:10.47852/bonviewglce32021120

Tokenized Indexed-Green Bonds: Funding the Decarbonisation of Ammonia Production

2023· article· en· W4389640700 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Don Charles

Bibliographic record

VenueGreen and Low-Carbon Economy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBondQuarter (Canadian coin)AmmoniaBusinessFinanceEconomicsGeographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to investigate how distributed ledger technology can be applied to the green bond market. Second, this study examines how green bonds can finance the suck cost of decarbonizing the ammonia industry. Third, this study seeks to forecast the spot price of ammonia. This forecast is relevant since the bond’s coupon should be indexed and linked to the price of ammonia. The proposed tokenized indexed-green bond is a new idea that leverages the technologies of distributed ledgers, indexation, and green bonds. No study to current date has undertaken such research that integrates these technologies to fund the decarbonization of the ammonia industry. Data was collected on the spot price of ammonia from the Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago online database at the monthly frequency over the January 1991 to June 2023 period. The applied forecasting methodology was a hybrid framework combining Particle Swarm Optimization and Support Vector Regression. This study found that an out-of-sample forecast for ammonia prices would be US$438.89/ton in the 1st quarter, US$289.99/ton by the 2nd quarter, US$448.30/ton by the 3rd quarter, and US$331.57/ton by the 4th quarter. The decarbonization of the ammonia industry is technically possible. Economically, it would involve leveraging several technologies such as green bond financing, tokenization, and indexation. Received: 26 May 2023 | Revised: 1 September 2023 | Accepted: 3 December 2023 Conflicts of Interest The author declares that he has no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement Data available on request from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Author Contribution Statement Don Charles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, resources, data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreen and Low-Carbon EconomySame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207