Application of Land Use Regression to Estimate Long-Term Concentrations of Traffic-Related Nitrogen Oxides and Fine Particulate Matter
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land use regression (LUR) is a promising technique for predicting ambient air pollutant concentrations at high spatial resolution. We expand on previous work by modeling oxides of nitrogen and fine particulate matter in Vancouver, Canada, using two measures of traffic. Systematic review of historical data identified optimal sampling periods for NO and N02. Integrated 14-day mean concentrations were measured with passive samplers at 116 sites in the spring and fall of 2003. Study estimates for annual mean NO and NO2 ranged from 5.4-98.7 and 4.8-28.0 ppb, respectively. Regulatory measurements ranged from 4.8-29.7 and 9.0-24.1 ppb and exhibited less spatial variability. Measurements of particle mass concentration (PM2.5) and light absorbance (ABS) were made at a subset of 25 sites during another campaign. Fifty-five variables describing each sampling site were generated in a Geographic Information System (GIS) and linear regression models for NO, NO2, PM2.5, and ABS were built with the most predictive covariates. Adjusted R(2) values ranged from 0.39 to 0.62 and were similar across traffic metrics. Resulting maps show the distribution of NO to be more heterogeneous than that of NO2, supporting the usefulness of this approach for assessing spatial patterns of traffic-related pollution.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it