MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168262293 · doi:10.1029/2021ea001694

Regional Forecasting of Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations: A Novel Hybrid Model Based on Principal Component Regression and EOF

2021· article· en· W3168262293 on OpenAlexaff
Xianghua Wu, Kang Xie, Jane Liu, Duanyang Liu, Jieqin Zhou, Lili Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Space Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEmpirical orthogonal functionsPrincipal component analysisEnvironmental scienceAir quality indexEconometricsVariance (accounting)RegressionPrincipal component regressionRegression analysisExplained variationStatisticsComputer scienceMeteorologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When many cities need quantitative forecasts of air quality to adjust industrial production plans and urbanization development, how to build an efficient forecast model remain a challenge. Methodology for quantitative prediction of air quality can no longer rely on single‐site observations, and thus approaches that require fewer input data and are more efficient and more reliable need to be explored. This paper proposes the principles and steps of a new model using the empirical orthogonal function (EOF) and principal component regression (PCR), which is a hybrid EOF‐PCR approach that decomposes the panel data of PM 2.5 and predictors into spatial structures (EOFs) and time expansion coefficients (ECs) by EOF analysis, establishes the PCR of the ECs of PM 2.5 , and simulates the PM 2.5 concentrations in each city by projecting the fitted ECs through EOFs. The very heart of the new model is the PCR modeling and projection. The results are presented for PM 2.5 concentrations over Jiangsu Province in eastern China. The results show that this EOF‐PCR model, which is based on EC1s with a cumulative variance contribution rate above 90%, has an average prediction accuracy of 65%. The model performs best in spring and autumn, better in summer and worst in winter. Most predictors have a maximum lag of a week, and they are quite different among seasons. Considering the influence of the spatial distributions of predictors, rather than covariates at a single site, this model can reflect regional influences and effectively improve the simulation effect.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Space ScienceSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207