Global Estimates and Long-Term Trends of Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations (1998–2018)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is a leading risk factor for mortality. We develop global estimates of annual PM2.5 concentrations and trends for 1998–2018 using advances in satellite observations, chemical transport modeling, and ground-based monitoring. Aerosol optical depths (AODs) from advanced satellite products including finer resolution, increased global coverage, and improved long-term stability are combined and related to surface PM2.5 concentrations using geophysical relationships between surface PM2.5 and AOD simulated by the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model with updated algorithms. The resultant annual mean geophysical PM2.5 estimates are highly consistent with globally distributed ground monitors (R2 = 0.81; slope = 0.90). Geographically weighted regression is applied to the geophysical PM2.5 estimates to predict and account for the residual bias with PM2.5 monitors, yielding even higher cross validated agreement (R2 = 0.90–0.92; slope = 0.90–0.97) with ground monitors and improved agreement compared to all earlier global estimates. The consistent long-term satellite AOD and simulation enable trend assessment over a 21 year period, identifying significant trends for eastern North America (−0.28 ± 0.03 μg/m3/yr), Europe (−0.15 ± 0.03 μg/m3/yr), India (1.13 ± 0.15 μg/m3/yr), and globally (0.04 ± 0.02 μg/m3/yr). The positive trend (2.44 ± 0.44 μg/m3/yr) for India over 2005–2013 and the negative trend (−3.37 ± 0.38 μg/m3/yr) for China over 2011–2018 are remarkable, with implications for the health of billions of people.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".