MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

APPLICATION OF DISTRIBUTED URBAN SENSOR NETWORKS FOR ACTIONABLE AIR QUALITY DATA

2020· article· en· W3087492495 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eric Morris, X. Liu, A. Manwar, Dexuan Zang, Greg J. Evans, J. R. Brook, B. Rousseau, C. Clark, James D MacIsaac

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsLakeridge HealthOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of TorontoAUG Signals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir quality indexAir pollutionWireless sensor networkSmart cityComputer scienceData qualityHuman healthPollutantQuality (philosophy)Transport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningBusinessComputer securityEngineeringGeographyMeteorologyInternet of ThingsComputer networkEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Ambient air pollution continues to be a major human health burden around the world. Cities with existing smart data infrastructure, and those with smart city aspirations, would benefit from the integration of real-time data from an air quality sensor network. AirSENCE™ is one such sensor which monitors eight common pollutants at low cost. It has been deployed in Canada in cities of the Greater Toronto Area, e.g. the City of Oshawa, to augment the existing urban data network and study the impacts of traffic flow and land usage on air quality. Results reveal that distributed sensors are highly useful for detecting localized pollution events that would otherwise go undetected, providing policymakers with a valuable, actionable data for protecting public health. Coupling air quality sensors with other smart city data (traffic monitors in this case) was shown to provide a more comprehensive representation of how air pollutant levels are affected by human activity, which can better inform city planning decisions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207