MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010678482

Item based CO2 emission calculation method

2023· other· en· W7010678482 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasGlobal warmingMontreal ProtocolProcess (computing)Global-warming potentialUnit (ring theory)Product (mathematics)Production (economics)Climate change
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global warming is one of the main threats to the Earth, caused by the release of greenhouse gases. Gases are measured by their global warming potential (GWP), which is an air pollutant’s relative potency to contribute towards global warming compared to CO2 during a 100-year time period in the atmosphere. The related unit is CO2e (CO2-equivalent), and it commonly accounts for seven greenhouse gases, measured in kgCO2e/kg. GWP and the related CO2e are common climate metrics used in management and policies. \n \nTeknikum Oy is a provider of polymer technologies, selling rubber and plastic components and products, used for example in agricultural, mining and railway industries. Teknikum Oy has opted into Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), as such they have undertaken a full companywide CO2e assessment in 2020 following the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol. Since the GHG Protocol does not provide product specific CO2e factors, which are needed for process optimization and requested by clients, another tool is needed. \n \nTeknikum Oy’s item based CO2e tool accounts for the cradle-to-gate emissions and is utilizing the data collected for the GHG Protocol calculation. CO2e is calculated on a case-by-case basis for each item and customer. The tool was tested with a case calculation for a rubber component. \n \nWith the growing interest in environmental effects, reaching reduction targets, along with pressure from the public and governments, the demand for CO2e accounting is increasing. CO2e assessments provide additional marketing bene-fits, help in emission reduction, and provide basis for the analysis. A smaller CO2e value indicates more effective processes. \n \nThis thesis acts as the theory and validation of a such tool, and manual for the transparency and use of the tool. A tool such as this is tailored by the consultant to meet the needs of the client based on their unique company processes. Whilst a tool can provide a relatively reliable calculation, limited datasets can hinder accuracy and how the result is validated needs to be reported. The accounting results can both guide and imply, but a thorough environmental analysis requires multiple impact categories, and some of them could be qualitative. Overall, shifting from the dependency of the use of fossil fuels is key.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.023

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen)→Same topicEarly Childhood Education and Development→French-language works237,207→