MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803741996 · doi:10.3390/atmos9050191

Multi-Year Continuous PM2.5 Measurements with the Federal Equivalent Method SHARP 5030 and Comparisons to Filter-Based and TEOM Measurements in Ontario, Canada

2018· article· en· W2803741996 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsParticulatesStatisticsEnvironmental scienceMathematicsAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyPhysicsBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous monitoring of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is important to provide near-real-time air quality information for public health protection, especially when ambient levels are elevated. The Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM), operated at 30 °C with a sample equilibration system (SES), was used to measure PM2.5 hourly concentrations from 2002 to 2012 in Ontario, Canada. In January 2013, the Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate (SHARP) model 5030 monitors replaced the TEOM devices at all monitoring stations across the province to improve measurements in cold months. Continuous PM2.5 measurements from 2013 to 2016 showed good reliability of the SHARP 5030 with an average 98% valid hourly data reported to the public. Collocated measurements indicated that 24 h averages of the SHARP 5030 were comparable to those by the filter-based integrated samplers including the Federal Reference Method (FRM), and the FEM dichotomous (Dichot) and Speciation samplers. The slope and intercept of the linear regression between the SHARP 5030 and the FRM results generally met the acceptance limits for PM2.5 Class III FEM designation, and the ratio of FEM/FRM was 1.0 or 1.1. Twenty-four-hour averages of the SHARP 5030 also correlated well with the collocated 24 h Dichot and Speciation results. The difference percentages between SHARP 5030 and 24 h integrated results were found to be larger at low rather than at high PM2.5 levels, but not dependent on seasons. Absolute differences ranged from 0 to 16 µg/m3 and root mean square differences ranged from 2.0 to 2.3 µg/m3 when the SHARP 5030 was compared with the FRM, Dichot, and Speciation samplers. A simplified approach was further developed to correct historical TEOM data for cold months to continue long-term trend analyses based on collocated measurements at eight stations where PM2.5 emission sources varied.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.207 · 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