Optimizing Data Pipelines for Green AI: A Comparative Analysis of Pandas, Polars, and PySpark for CO2 Emission Prediction
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
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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