Multiscale Spatial and Temporal Modelling of Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) from Wildfire Smoke Using Remote Sensing and Statistical Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wildfire smoke exposure is increasingly recognized as a critical public health problem due to the increase in the frequency and severity of wildfires in recent decades. Wildfire smoke-generated PM2.5 is considered the most concerning particulate, as it can be inhaled deep into the lungs, penetrate the human respiratory system, and enter the bloodstream. Studies assessing wildfire PM2.5 exposure and population health have traditionally employed three main approaches: (1) in situ measurements (2) satellite information of atmospheric aerosol, and (3) atmospheric models. The objective of the present study was to identify models to accurately predict PM2.5 concentration over space and time. Spatiotemporal models were built to perform a comprehensive analysis of wildfire PM2.5 concentrations, for each recent year over the study region: Land Use Regression (LUR), Linear Mixed Effect (LME), and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Predictor variables were MODIS AOD images, ground PM2.5 measurements, and ancillary land use and meteorological data. LUR models were used to predict PM2.5 in three distinct periods: before, during, and after a wildfire. Results showed a major difference in predictors between the during-fire and the other models, due to the different contribution of traffic and industrial emissions. Daily estimation of PM2.5 concentration was derived by incorporating nested period-zone-specific random effects of the AOD-PM2.5 relationship over the province of Alberta, Canada using LME models. The LME model’s predictions also improved when additional variables were integrated with AOD measures in a multivariate framework. ANN models were used as a multivariate and non-parametric approach to empirically predict wildfire smoke using AOD along with other predictors. Daily PM2.5 concentrations were predicted using temporal and spatial ANN for the 2014 to 2017 fire seasons and each airshed zone in Alberta. The study demonstrated how MODIS AOD could be incorporated within statistical models to provide reliable predictions of daily PM2.5 concentrations over wildfire events, to feed health and epidemiological studies. The results demonstrated that mixed effect models outperformed the LUR models owing to their ability to adjust the varying relationship of AOD-PM2.5. ANN models also outperformed them owing to their advantage in modelling non-parametric and non-linear behaviours.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".