MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046561348 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v13n4p204

Assessment of the Spatial Relationship between Air Pollutants in Kaduna Metropolis, Nigeria

2020· article· en· W3046561348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mwanret Gideon Daful, Taiye Oluwafemi Adewuyi, Muktar Muhammad, Oluwafemi Oluwole, A. Dadan-Garba, Cyril Kanayochukwu Ezeamaka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutantParticulatesEnvironmental scienceAir pollutantsSulfur dioxideGeographically Weighted RegressionAir pollutionCarbon dioxideEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringAtmospheric sciencesChemistryMathematicsStatisticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzes the varying spatial relationship between air pollutants [Carbon monoxide (CO), Sulphur dioxide (SO2), Carbon dioxide (CO2) and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10)] in Kaduna metropolis. This was aimed at having more insight into be characteristics of air pollutants in the study area, which was geared towards efficient environmental management of the city. Validated portable pollutant monitors (MSA Altair 5x Gas Detectora, CO2 meter Model AZ-0002-DL and CW-HAT200 Particulate Counter) were utilized for data collection, on the concentration of air pollutants CO and SO2; CO2 and particulate matters (PM2.5 and PM10) respectively. Pearson correlation and Geographical Weighed Regression (GWR) were used for data analysis, whereas, maps and tables were utilized for data presentation. The findings revealed that a non - perfect positive linear relationship exists between the air pollutants. The GWR model revealed that the distribution of the local R2 values vary spatially across Kaduna Metropolis, indicating that there is a spatially varying relationship between the air pollutants. Higher R2 values were mostly in the central and southern part of the metropolis except for PM2.5 and PM10 in the Northern part of the metropolis. The finding further reveals that CO has the strongest association with SO2, SO2 has the strongest association with PM2.5 and PM10, CO2 with SO2, PM10 has the highest association with PM2.5, likewise PM2.5 with PM10. The use of GWR to establish the existence of locally varying relationship between the air pollutants was successful. Hence, this study recommends the use of GWR to model air pollutants in cities with limited monitoring capability.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207