MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907961745 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.6321327.v1

Reduce carbon emissions efficiently: The influencing factors and decoupling relationships of carbon emission from high-energy consumption and high-emission industries in China

2022· other· en· W6907961745 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDivisia indexGreenhouse gasDecoupling (probability)Emission intensityEnergy intensityPer capitaEnergy consumptionCarbon fibersGross domestic product

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-energy consumption and high-emission industries contribute a lot to economic development, but their carbon emissions are also huge. In order to achieve the dual-carbon target as early as possible, it is necessary to reduce the carbon emissions of high-energy consumption and high-emission industries. This paper selected five representative factors (population, per capita gross domestic product (GDP), energy intensity, energy structure and carbon emission coefficient) and adopted the logarithmic mean divisia index (LMDI) method to decompose the driving factors of carbon emissions. Therefore, this paper uses Tapio decoupling model to analyze the decoupling relationship between the two factors with the greatest impact on carbon emissions and carbon emissions. The results show that: (i) There is a good decoupling between high-energy consumption and high-emission industries and per capita GDP, and the impact of per capita GDP on carbon emissions will gradually decrease in the future; (ii) The decoupling relationship between carbon emissions and energy intensity is poor. For some industries, the reduction of energy intensity can help reduce carbon emissions. Finally, this paper puts forward some suggestions to promote carbon emission reduction. This paper provides theoretical support for studying how to reduce carbon emissions and formulate relevant emission reduction policies in the high-energy consumption and high-emission industries.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataFrench-language works237,207