A blockchain model connecting electricity market and carbon trading market
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many countries adopt carbon trading mechanism as the main policy tool to control carbon emissions . Although carbon trading systems have been established, there are still some ongoing problems such as inconsistent carbon accounting standards, data distortion and inefficient overall process within these systems. We propose an innovative blockchain model that integrates the carbon trading system, initial carbon allowance allocation by regulatory authorities, electricity consumers, and power generation firms into a unified framework. By connecting these components, the model facilitates government regulation, emission reduction by electricity companies, electricity purchasing by consumers, and trading of surplus carbon allowances in the carbon market . The key innovations of our model include the establishment of a standardized carbon accounting system, enhanced data transparency to reduce the risk of data falsification, and a two-stage differential game framework that optimizes social welfare through effective control of total carbon emissions . Our simulations demonstrate that this blockchain system can effectively stabilize carbon emissions at a desirable level, thereby contributing to more efficient pollution control .
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it