MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413133192 · doi:10.3390/computers14080319

Optimizing Data Pipelines for Green AI: A Comparative Analysis of Pandas, Polars, and PySpark for CO2 Emission Prediction

2025· article· en· W4413133192 on OpenAlexaff
Youssef Mekouar, Mohammed Lahmer, Mohammed Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Computer scienceEnergy consumptionPipeline transportGeospatial analysisEfficient energy useReal-time computingEngineeringRemote sensingOperating systemElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the performance and energy trade-offs of three popular data processing libraries—Pandas, PySpark, and Polars—applied to GreenNav, a CO2 emission prediction pipeline for urban traffic. GreenNav is an eco-friendly navigation app designed to predict CO2 emissions and determine low-carbon routes using a hybrid CNN-LSTM model integrated into a complete pipeline for the ingestion and processing of large, heterogeneous geospatial and road data. Our study quantifies the end-to-end execution time, cumulative CPU load, and maximum RAM consumption for each library when applied to the GreenNav pipeline; it then converts these metrics into energy consumption and CO2 equivalents. Experiments conducted on datasets ranging from 100 MB to 8 GB demonstrate that Polars in lazy mode offers substantial gains, reducing the processing time by a factor of more than twenty, memory consumption by about two-thirds, and energy consumption by about 60%, while maintaining the predictive accuracy of the model (R2 ≈ 0.91). These results clearly show that the careful selection of data processing libraries can reconcile high computing performance and environmental sustainability in large-scale machine learning applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputersSame topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207