MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406227143 · doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2024.12.094

An identification of models to help in the design of national strategies and policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

2025· article· en· W4406227143 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle Maia de Souza, Radhwane Boukelouha, Emma Frejinger, Catherine Morency, Normand Mousseau, Martin Trépanier

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation research procedia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMontreal Clinical Research InstituteUniversité de MontréalTransport Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasIdentification (biology)Environmental economicsEnvironmental scienceBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the rapid increase in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 196 countries have made a legal commitment to implement a strategy to decarbonize their economies, under the Paris Agreement, particularly with respect to the transportation sector. As part of their long-term climate actions, these countries are defining various Avoid/Reduce, Shift and Improve (A-S-I) strategies, aimed at reducing or avoiding unnecessary travel, promoting and shifting to public transport and active modes, and improving energy efficiency and vehicle technology. In this paper, we take a closer look at some of the regional and national strategies and policies to reduce GHG emissions in Europe, as well as the models and methods used to assist in policy development. Keeping in mind the limited guidance on concrete avoidance/reduction and transfer strategies mentioned in the climate actions, we list some of the land use and transport interaction (LUTI) models that can be used to improve climate change control at the urban scale. The aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of how methods and tools can assist in decision making and policy development with respect to GHG emission reduction goals in the transportation sector.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation research procediaSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207