A Spatial Model of Urban Winter Woodsmoke Concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many urban areas, residential wood burning is a significant wintertime source of PM2.5. In this study, we used a combination of fixed and mobile monitoring along with a novel spatial buffering procedure to estimate the spatial patterns of woodsmoke. Two-week average PM2.5 and levoglucosan (a marker for wood smoke) concentrations were concurrently measured at upto seven sites in the study region. In addition, pre-selected routes spanning the major population areas in and around Vancouver, B.C. were traversed during 19 cold, clear winter evenings from November, 2004 to March, 2005 by a vehicle equipped with GPS receiver and a nephelometer. Fifteen-second-average values of light scattering coefficient (bsp) were adjusted for variations between evenings and then combined into a single, highly resolved map of nighttime winter bsp levels. A relatively simple but robust (R(2) = 0.64) land use regression model was developed using selected spatial covariates to predict these temporally adjusted bsp values. The bsp values predicted by this model were also correlated with the measured average levoglucosan concentrations at our fixed site locations (R(2) = 0.66). This model, the first application of land use regression for woodsmoke, enabled the identification and prediction of previously unrecognized high woodsmoke regions within an urban airshed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".