PM<sub>2.5</sub> Population Exposure in New Delhi Using a Probabilistic Simulation Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a Geographical Information System (GIS) based probabilistic simulation framework to estimate PM2.5 population exposure in New Delhi, India. The framework integrates PM2.5 output from spatiotemporal LUR models and trip distribution data using a Gravity model based on zonal data for population, employment and enrollment in educational institutions. Time-activity patterns were derived from a survey of randomly sampled individuals (n = 1012) and in-vehicle exposure was estimated using microenvironmental monitoring data based on field measurements. We simulated population exposure for three different scenarios to capture stay-at-home populations (Scenario 1), working population exposed to near-road concentrations during commutes (Scenario 2), and the working population exposed to on-road concentrations during commutes (Scenario 3). Simulated annual average levels of PM2.5 exposure across the entire city were very high, and particularly severe in the winter months: ∼200 μg m(-3) in November, roughly four times higher compared to the lower levels in the monsoon season. Mean annual exposures ranged from 109 μg m(-3) (IQR: 97-120 μg m(-3)) for Scenario 1, to 121 μg m(-3) (IQR: 110-131 μg m(-3)), and 125 μg m(-3) (IQR: 114-136 μ gm(-3)) for Scenarios 2 and 3 respectively. Ignoring the effects of mobility causes the average annual PM2.5 population exposure to be underestimated by only 11%.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".