MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803892188 · doi:10.1080/10962247.2018.1459956

Forecasting air quality time series using deep learning

2018· article· en· W2803892188 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian S. Freeman, Graham W. Taylor, Bahram Gharabaghi, Jesse Van Griensven Thé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsLakes Environmental (Canada)University of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAir quality indexSeries (stratigraphy)Environmental scienceTime seriesMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents one of the first applications of deep learning (DL) techniques to predict air pollution time series. Air quality management relies extensively on time series data captured at air monitoring stations as the basis of identifying population exposure to airborne pollutants and determining compliance with local ambient air standards. In this paper, 8 hr averaged surface ozone (O3) concentrations were predicted using deep learning consisting of a recurrent neural network (RNN) with long short-term memory (LSTM). Hourly air quality and meteorological data were used to train and forecast values up to 72 hours with low error rates. The LSTM was able to forecast the duration of continuous O3 exceedances as well. Prior to training the network, the dataset was reviewed for missing data and outliers. Missing data were imputed using a novel technique that averaged gaps less than eight time steps with incremental steps based on first-order differences of neighboring time periods. Data were then used to train decision trees to evaluate input feature importance over different time prediction horizons. The number of features used to train the LSTM model was reduced from 25 features to 5 features, resulting in improved accuracy as measured by Mean Absolute Error (MAE). Parameter sensitivity analysis identified look-back nodes associated with the RNN proved to be a significant source of error if not aligned with the prediction horizon. Overall, MAE's less than 2 were calculated for predictions out to 72 hours.Implications: Novel deep learning techniques were used to train an 8-hour averaged ozone forecast model. Missing data and outliers within the captured data set were replaced using a new imputation method that generated calculated values closer to the expected value based on the time and season. Decision trees were used to identify input variables with the greatest importance. The methods presented in this paper allow air managers to forecast long range air pollution concentration while only monitoring key parameters and without transforming the data set in its entirety, thus allowing real time inputs and continuous prediction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations310
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Air & Waste Management AssociationSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207