Designing and Integrating Composite Networks for Monitoring Multivariate Gaussian Pollution Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Networks of ambient monitoring stations are used to monitor environmental pollution fields such as those for acid rain and air pollution. Such stations provide regular measurements of pollutant concentrations. The networks are established for a variety of purposes at various times so often several stations measuring different subsets of pollutant concentrations can be found in compact geographical regions. The problem of statistically combining these disparate information sources into a single ‘network’ then arises. Capitalizing on the efficiencies so achieved can then lead to the secondary problem of extending this network. The subject of this paper is a set of 31 air pollution monitoring stations in southern Ontario. Each of these regularly measures a particular subset of ionic sulphate, sulphite, nitrite and ozone. However, this subset varies from station to station. For example only two stations measure all four. Some measure just one. We describe a Bayesian framework for integrating the measurements of these stations to yield a spatial predictive distribution for unmonitored sites and unmeasured concentrations at existing stations. Furthermore we show how this network can be extended by using an entropy maximization criterion. The methods assume that the multivariate response field being measured has a joint Gaussian distribution conditional on its mean and covariance function. A conjugate prior is used for these parameters, some of its hyperparameters being fitted empirically.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".