Modeling Wildfire Smoke Pollution by Integrating Land Use Regression and Remote Sensing Data: Regional Multi-Temporal Estimates for Public Health and Exposure Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand the health effects of wildfire smoke, it is important to accurately assess smoke exposure over space and time. Particulate matter (PM) is a predominant pollutant in wildfire smoke. In this study, we develop land-use regression (LUR) models to investigate the impact that a cluster of wildfires in the northwest USA had on the level of PM in southern Alberta (Canada), in the summer of 2015. Univariate aerosol optical depth (AOD) and multivariate AOD-LUR models were used to estimate the level of PM2.5 in urban and rural areas. For epidemiological studies, it is also important to distinguish between wildfire-related PM2.5 and PM2.5 originating from other sources. We therefore subdivided the study period into three sub-periods: (1) Pre-fire, (2) during-fire, and (3) post-fire. We then developed separate models for each sub-period. With this approach, we were able to identify different predictors significantly associated with smoke-related PM2.5 verses PM2.5 of different origin. Leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) was used to evaluate the models’ performance. Our results indicate that model predictors and model performance are highly related to the level of PM2.5, and the pollution source. The predictive ability of both uni- and multi-variate models were higher in the during-fire period than in the pre- and post-fire periods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".