MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116760576 · doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.116905

Assessing the carbon peak challenge in extremely cold regions: Scenario analysis of building emissions via an integrated Kaya-LMDI-SD framework

2025· article· en· W7116760576 on OpenAlexaff
Yehang Li, Xinshuai Geng, Gaopeng Li, Fujun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy and Buildings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsDivisia indexPer capitaScenario analysisGreenhouse gasEnergy consumptionCarbon fibersBaseline (sea)Emission intensityEnergy intensity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The building sector is a major contributor to energy consumption and carbon emissions in China, playing a pivotal role in achieving the dual carbon goals. In extremely cold regions, building carbon emission intensity substantially surpasses that of other areas, yet the underlying mechanisms remain underexplored. This study develops an integrated framework combining the Kaya identity, the logarithmic mean Divisia index (LMDI), and a system dynamics (SD) model. Jilin Province, China, serves as a case study to identify the drivers of building carbon emissions and forecast future trends under multiple scenarios. Results indicate that between 2006 and 2022, per capita GDP and per capita urban building floor area were the primary drivers of emission growth, whereas the energy intensity of the tertiary sector and per capita energy consumption had significant inhibitory effects. Scenario analysis projects peak emissions of 73.35 MtCO 2 in 2031 under the low-carbon scenario, 86.90 MtCO 2 in 2034 under the baseline scenario, and 106.09 MtCO 2 in 2037 under the high-carbon scenario. Achieving the 2030 carbon peak target for Jilin’s building sector remains a formidable challenge. This study proposes targeted carbon reduction pathways, offering critical insights for evidence-based low-carbon policy development in extremely cold regions.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy and BuildingsSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207