Exposures to Air Pollution and Noise from Multi-Modal Commuting in a Chinese City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Modern urban travel includes mixtures of transit options, which potentially impact individual pollution exposures and health. This study aims to investigate variations in traffic-related air pollution and noise levels experienced in traffic in Chengdu, China. Methods: Real-time PM2.5, black carbon (BC), and noise levels were measured for four transportation modes (car, bus, subway, and shared bike) on scripted routes in three types of neighborhoods (urban core, developing neighborhood, and suburb). Each mode of transportation in each neighborhood was sampled five times in summer and winter, respectively. After quality control, mixed effect models were built for the three pollutants separately. Results: Air pollutants had much higher concentrations in winter. Urban Core had the highest PM2.5 and BC concentrations across seasons compared to the other neighborhoods. The mixed effect model indicated that car commutes were associated with lower PM2.5 (−34.4 μg/m3; 95% CI: −47.5, −21.3), BC (−2016.4 ng/m3; 95% CI: −3383.8, −648.6), and noise (−9.3 dBA; 95% CI: −10.5, −8.0) levels compared with other modes; subway commutes had lower PM2.5 (−11.9 μg/m3; 95% CI: 47.5, −21.3), but higher BC (2349.6 ng/m3; 95% CI: 978.1, 3722.1) and noise (3.0 dBA; 95% CI: 1.7, 4.3) levels than the other three modes of transportation. Conclusion: Personal exposure to air pollution and noise vary by season, neighborhood, and transportation modes. Exposure models accounting for environmental, meteorological, and behavioral factors, and duration of mixed mode commuting may be useful for health studies of urban traffic microenvironments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".