MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408430133 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-15759

Assessing European HFC Emissions Using Inverse Modelling Systems

2025· preprint· en· W4408430133 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hélène De Longueville, Daniela Brito Melo, Alice E. Ramsden, Alison L. Redington, Alexandre Danjou, Peter Andrews, Joseph Pitt, Brendan Murphy, Matthew Rigby, Stephan Henne, Alistair J. Manning, Anita L. Ganesan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Sensor Networks for Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverseEnvironmental scienceEconometricsComputer scienceEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are potent greenhouse gases that contribute substantially to climate change. Their emissions are rapidly evolving due to changes in production and use that are driven by the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol and regional regulations. Atmospheric data and inverse modelling systems can be valuable for evaluating the effectiveness of these controls and the emissions reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Currently in Europe, the United Kingdom and Switzerland include atmospheric top-down emission estimates as part of their National Inventory Reports to the UNFCCC, and now the Horizon Europe project Process Attribution of Regional emISsions (PARIS) aims to expand similar inventory evaluation to several additional European countries. In this PARIS study, we derived HFC emissions for north-western Europe from 2012 to 2023 using the NAME transport model and three Bayesian inversion systems (InTEM, ELRIS, RHIME), focusing on HFC-134a, HFC-143a, HFC-32, HFC-125, HFC-23, HFC-152a, HFC-227ea, HFC-236fa, HFC-245fa, HFC-365mfc, and HFC-4310mee. Our results indicate an overall decline in HFC emissions in north-western Europe, broadly consistent with European F-gas regulations. Derived emissions trends are compared with National Inventory Reports, highlighting discrepancies. Moreover, we explore the driving factors behind these trends. These findings contribute to understanding emissions trends and improving inventory evaluations in Europe.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Sensor Networks for Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207