Fig 1.
Schematic diagram of the interaction between EG and EC.
Fig 2.
Flowchart of the VAR model construction process.
Fig 3.
Schematic diagram of the EKC for GDP and EQ.
Fig 4.
Differential evolutionary algorithm working mechanism and flow.
Fig 5.
Schematic diagram of the improved K-modes clustering process.
Fig 6.
Improved DE algorithm to optimize VAR model flowchart.
Fig 7.
Comparison of population evolution of different algorithms (GA).
Fig 8.
Comparison of population evolution of different algorithms (DE).
Fig 9.
Comparison of population evolution of different algorithms (Improvement of DE).
Fig 10.
Comparison of HV and IGD for different optimization algorithms (HV).
Fig 11.
Comparison of HV and IGD for different optimization algorithms (IGD).
Table 1.
Sequential smoothness test results.
Table 2.
Estimated results of lag order of ADF test.
Table 3.
Johansen cointegration test results.
Table 4.
Stability test results of the VAR model.
Table 5.
Results of residual autocorrelation test.
Table 6.
Results of ARCH effect test.
Table 7.
Impulse response analysis results based on bootstrap method.
Table 8.
VAR model granger test results.
Table 9.
Time-varying characteristics of GDP impulse response coefficient to EC.
Table 10.
Cumulative impulse response of UR to GDP and EC.
Table 11.
Empirical test results of EKC.
Fig 12.
Plot of impulse response analysis between variables (EQ).
Fig 13.
Plot of Impulse response analysis between variables (GDP).
Fig 14.
Plot of impulse response analysis between variables (UR).
Fig 15.
Plot of impulse response analysis between variables (EC).
Fig 16.
Decomposition of variance for different variables (EQ variance decomposition).
Fig 17.
Decomposition of variance for different variables (GDP variance decomposition).
Fig 18.
Decomposition of variance for different variables (UR variance decomposition).
Fig 19.
Decomposition of Variance for Different Variables (EC variance decomposition).
Fig 20.
Comparison of dynamic prediction results analysis (Comparison of economic growth forecasts).
Fig 21.
Comparison of dynamic prediction results analysis (Comparison of energy consumption forecasts).