MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744057969 · doi:10.5194/amt-2017-260

Closing the gap on lower cost air quality monitoring: machine learning calibration models to improve low-cost sensor performance

2017· article· en· W2744057969 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeinz EndowmentsU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsCalibrationRandom forestUnivariateApproximation errorEnvironmental scienceStatisticsLinear regressionComputer scienceAir quality indexMean squared errorMultivariate statisticsMachine learningMathematicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Low-cost sensing strategies hold the promise of denser air quality monitoring networks, which could significantly improve our understanding of personal air pollution exposure. Additionally, low-cost air quality sensors could be deployed to areas where limited monitoring exists. However, low-cost sensors are frequently sensitive to environmental conditions and pollutant cross-sensitivities, which have historically been poorly addressed by laboratory calibrations, limiting their utility for monitoring. In this study, we investigated different calibration models for the Real-time Affordable Multi-Pollutant (RAMP) sensor package, which measures CO, NO2, O3, and CO2. We explored three methods: 1) laboratory univariate linear regression, 2) empirical multivariate linear regression and 3) machine-learning based calibration models using random forests (RF). Calibration models were developed for 19 RAMP monitors using training and testing windows spanning August 2016 through February 2017 in Pittsburgh, PA. The random forest models matched (CO) or significantly outperformed (NO2, CO2, O3) the other calibration models, and their accuracy and precision was robust over time for testing windows of up to 16 weeks. Following calibration, average mean absolute error on the testing dataset from the random forest models was 38 ppb for CO (14 % relative error), 10 ppm for CO2 (2 % relative error), 3.5 ppb for NO2 (29 % relative error) and 3.4 ppb for O3 (15 % relative error), and Pearson r versus the reference monitors exceeded 0.8 for most units. Model performance is explored in detail, including a quantification of model variable importance, accuracy across different concentration ranges, and performance in a range of monitoring contexts including the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and the US EPA Air Sensors Guidebook recommendations of minimum data quality for personal exposure measurement. A key strength of the RF approach is that it accounts for pollutant cross sensitivities. This highlights the importance of developing multipollutant sensor packages (as opposed to single pollutant monitors); we determined this is especially critical for NO2 and CO2. The evaluation reveals that only the RF-calibrated sensors meet the US EPA Air Sensors Guidebook recommendations of minimum data quality for personal exposure measurement. We also demonstrate that the RF model calibrated sensors could detect differences in NO2 concentrations between a near-road site and a suburban site less than 1.5 km away. From this study, we conclude that combining RF models with the RAMP monitors appears to be a very promising approach to address the poor performance that has plagued low cost air quality sensors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207