MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416127927 · doi:10.14453/aabfj.v19i4.02

Decomposing Carbon Emissions: LMDI with Country-Specific Insights and Panel Data Analysis

2025· article· W4416127927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amit Kumar Singh, Srishti Jain

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Accounting Business and Finance Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataEnergy intensityClean energyPopulationEstimatorGreenhouse gasIndex (typography)Fossil fuelUnit (ring theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ongoing planetary crisis has prompted us to conduct this study, which analyzes 18 leading polluters over the period from 1995 to 2023. The countries considered are the United States of America, Mexico, and Canada in North America; India, China, Japan, Russia, and Iran in Asia; Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Poland, Italy, and Ukraine in Europe; and South Africa, Egypt, Algeria, and Nigeria in Africa. The study aims to determine the factors influencing CO2 emissions based on the improvised version of the Kaya identity, focusing on clean energy and fossil fuels. To be precise, population (POP), economic activity factor (EAF), clean energy intensity (CEI), energy transition (ET), and emission per unit of non-renewable energy (EM_NRE) are considered in the present work. Logarithmic Mean Divisa Index (LMDI) has been employed for analyzing individual countries because of the structural differences and varying energy grids. Further, a long-run relationship has been studied using long-run estimators suitable for the four panels. The results suggest that each factor impacts the level of carbon emissions differently. The panel consists of integrated economies with distinct structural differences; hence, historical economic shocks impact the nations in different ways. The result manifests that the countries must increase the share of clean energy in their power grid.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 venueAustralasian Accounting Business and Finance JournalSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207