Machine learning algorithms for supporting life cycle assessment studies: An analytical review

IF 10.9 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Sustainable Production and Consumption Pub Date : 2025-03-17 DOI:10.1016/j.spc.2025.03.015
Bishwash Neupane , Farouk Belkadi , Marco Formentini , Emmanuel Rozière , Benoît Hilloulin , Shoeib Faraji Abdolmaleki , Michael Mensah
{"title":"Machine learning algorithms for supporting life cycle assessment studies: An analytical review","authors":"Bishwash Neupane ,&nbsp;Farouk Belkadi ,&nbsp;Marco Formentini ,&nbsp;Emmanuel Rozière ,&nbsp;Benoît Hilloulin ,&nbsp;Shoeib Faraji Abdolmaleki ,&nbsp;Michael Mensah","doi":"10.1016/j.spc.2025.03.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Nowadays, industries face increasing pressure to enhance their environmental sustainability scores, particularly in reducing carbon footprints. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tools are commonly used to evaluate environmental impacts across organizational levels, enabling predictions for potential improvements. But complexity and diversity of factors influencing these assessments make prediction models difficult to build and validate. Machine learning (ML) techniques present viable solutions to these challenges.</div><div>This study presents a systematic literature review (SLR) of seventy-eight peer reviewed articles, evaluating the performance of different ML models in Life Cycle Assessments applications. An analytical ranking of these models is provided based on their effectiveness for LCA predictions using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Results indicate that Support Vector Machine (SVM) achieve a score of 0.6412, followed by Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) at 0.5811 and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) at 0.5650, and, positioning them as the most suitable models for LCA studies for prediction application. Random Forest (RF), Decision Trees (DT), and Linear Regression (LR) follow with scores of 0.5353, 0.4776, and 0.4633, respectively, while Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) and Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) rank lowest with scores of 0.4336 and 0.2791. Detailed interpretations and implications of these findings are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48619,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","volume":"56 ","pages":"Pages 37-53"},"PeriodicalIF":10.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235255092500065X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nowadays, industries face increasing pressure to enhance their environmental sustainability scores, particularly in reducing carbon footprints. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tools are commonly used to evaluate environmental impacts across organizational levels, enabling predictions for potential improvements. But complexity and diversity of factors influencing these assessments make prediction models difficult to build and validate. Machine learning (ML) techniques present viable solutions to these challenges.
This study presents a systematic literature review (SLR) of seventy-eight peer reviewed articles, evaluating the performance of different ML models in Life Cycle Assessments applications. An analytical ranking of these models is provided based on their effectiveness for LCA predictions using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Results indicate that Support Vector Machine (SVM) achieve a score of 0.6412, followed by Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) at 0.5811 and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) at 0.5650, and, positioning them as the most suitable models for LCA studies for prediction application. Random Forest (RF), Decision Trees (DT), and Linear Regression (LR) follow with scores of 0.5353, 0.4776, and 0.4633, respectively, while Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) and Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) rank lowest with scores of 0.4336 and 0.2791. Detailed interpretations and implications of these findings are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sustainable Production and Consumption
Sustainable Production and Consumption Environmental Science-Environmental Engineering
CiteScore
17.40
自引率
7.40%
发文量
389
审稿时长
13 days
期刊介绍: Sustainable production and consumption refers to the production and utilization of goods and services in a way that benefits society, is economically viable, and has minimal environmental impact throughout its entire lifespan. Our journal is dedicated to publishing top-notch interdisciplinary research and practical studies in this emerging field. We take a distinctive approach by examining the interplay between technology, consumption patterns, and policy to identify sustainable solutions for both production and consumption systems.
期刊最新文献
Machine learning algorithms for supporting life cycle assessment studies: An analytical review Translating planetary boundaries into city systems: Ecosystem services as metrics for safe and just production-consumption space Techno-economic and environmental assessment of closed-loop photovoltaic recycling in China Jute bags as a sustainable alternative to single-use plastic bags in Bangladesh: Rethinking the sole reliance on life cycle assessment Absolute environmental sustainability of solid biofuels: An investigation by different environmental-ecological performance indicators
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1