MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405099180 · doi:10.22215/etd/2024-16252

Transforming Green Financing: A Study of Blockchain Integration into the Canada Greener Homes Grant

2024· dissertation· en· W4405099180 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandr Zelenski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainIncentiveSustainabilityEnvironmental economicsBusinessBaseline (sea)FinanceEconomicsComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the integration of blockchain technology into the Canada Greener Homes Grant (CGHG) program to enhance its operational and economic efficiency.Using a mixed-methods approach, it compares two scenarios -the current operational framework (baseline) and a blockchain-enhanced scenario from 2021 to 2031 to inform Canada's efforts to achieve its sustainability goals.The scenarios are built from projections that facilitate a comparative analysis of key variables, including funds disbursed, household participation, energy bill savings, pollution savings, and administrative time and expenditure.Cost-benefit and effectiveness analyses are employed to assess the economic impacts of blockchain integration into the CGHG.Preliminary findings suggest that using blockchain technology could significantly reduce administrative and financial friction and improve the overall operational and economic efficiency of the CGHG program.Recommendations for Natural Resources Canada detail how blockchain technology could be further examined to advance sustainability and economic efficiency in future green incentive programs.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207