Optimized Allowance Allocation and Decision Support Based on L-BFGS Algorithm under a New Carbon Emission Trading Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the global climate change problem is getting more and more serious, carbon emission quota allocation is more and more emphasized by countries all over the world, while the traditional carbon quota allocation program has the problem of single objective.In order to improve the scientificity and acceptability of the carbon quota allocation scheme, this paper constructs indicators and forms multiobjective functions to formulate the carbon quota allocation scheme from the three perspectives of efficiency, fairness and sustainability, and builds a multi-objective optimization model for carbon quota allocation and decision support.Aiming at the solution problem of the carbon quota allocation model, an improved hybrid swarm algorithm based on Gaussian perturbation, tournament selection strategy and proposed Newtonian local optimization search operator (L-BFGS) is proposed.The model is used to explore the quota allocation scheme for cities in the Bohai Economic Rim in 2030.In the three single-target pre-allocation schemes based on the principles of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability, the difference between the cities with the largest and smallest quotas is 319 Mt, 289 Mt, and 256 Mt, respectively, which lacks scientificity and rationality.In contrast, the allocation results of the multi-objective pre-allocation scheme proposed by the carbon quota allocation model in this paper are relatively balanced and the difference is small, which can eliminate the conflict between multiple principles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".