MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400724347 · doi:10.3390/su16146114

Modeling and Monitoring CO2 Emissions in G20 Countries: A Comparative Analysis of Multiple Statistical Models

2024· article· en· W4400724347 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anwar Hussain, Firdos Khan, Olayan Albalawi

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical analysisEconometricsEnvironmental scienceRegional scienceEconomicsStatisticsGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) is considered one of the main factors responsible for one of the greatest challenges faced by the world today: climate change. On the other hand, with the increase in energy demand due to the increase in population and industrialization, the emission of CO2 has increased rapidly in the past few decades. However, the world’s leaders, including the United Nations, are now taking serious action on how to minimize the emission of CO2 into the atmosphere. Towards this end, accurate modeling and monitoring of historical CO2 can help in the development of rational policies. This study aims to analyze the carbon emitted by the Group Twenty (G20) countries for the period 1971–2021. The datasets include CO2 emissions, nonrenewable energy (NREN), renewable energy (REN), Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and Urbanization (URB). Various regression-based models, including multiple linear regression models, quantile regression models, and panel data models with different variants, were used to quantify the influence of independent variables on the response variable. In this study, CO2 is a response variable, and the other variables are covariates. The ultimate objective was to choose the best model among the competing models. It is noted that the USA, Canada, and Australia produced the highest amount of CO2 consistently for the entire duration; however, in the last decade (2011–2021) it has decreased to 12.63–17.95 metric tons per capita as compared to the duration of 1971–1980 (14.33–22.16 metric tons per capita). In contrast, CO2 emissions have increased in Saudi Arabia and China recently. For modeling purposes, the duration of the data has been divided into two independent, equal parts: 1971–1995 and 1996–2021. The panel fixed effect model (PFEM) and panel mixed effect model (PMEM) outperformed the other competing models using model selection and model prediction criteria. Different models provide different insights into the relationship between CO2 emissions and independent variables. In the later duration, all models show that REN has negative impacts on CO2 emissions, except the quantile regression model with tau = 0.25. In contrast, NREN has strong positive impacts on CO2 emissions. URB has significantly negative impacts on CO2 emissions globally. The findings of this study hold the potential to provide valuable information to policymakers on carbon emissions and monitoring globally. In addition, results can help in addressing some of the sustainable development goals of the United Nation Development Programme.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207