Air Pollution Modelling and Forecasting in Hamilton Using Data-Driven Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to provide an extensive evaluation of neural network models for the prediction and the simulation of some key air pollutants in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Hamilton experiences one of Canada's highest air pollution exposures because of the dual problem associated with continuing industrial emission and gradual increase of traffic related emissions along with the transboundary air pollutions from heavily industrialized neighboring north-eastern and mid-western US cities. These factors combined with meteorology, cause large degradation of Hamilton's air quality. Hence an appropriate and robust method is of most importance in order to get an early notification of the future air quality situation. Data driven methods such as neural networks (NNs) are becoming very popular due to their inherent capability to capture the complex non-linear relationships between pollutants, climatic and other non-climatic variables such as traffic variables, emission factors, etc. This study investigates dynamic neural networks, namely time lagged feed-forward neural network (TLFN), Bayesian neural network (BNN) and recurrent neural network (RNN) for short term forecasting. The results are being compared with the benchmark static multilayer perceptron (MLP) models. The analysis shows that TLFN model with its time delay memory and RNN with its adaptive memory has outperformed the static MLP models in ground level ozone (O_3) forecasting for up to 12 hours ahead. Furthermore the model developed using the annual database is able to map the variations in the seasonal concentrations. On the other hand, MLP model was quite competitive for nitrogen dioxide (NO_2) prediction when compared to the dynamic NN based models. The study further assesses the ability of the neural network models to generate pollutant concentrations at sites where sampling has not been done. Using these neural network models, data values were generated for total suspended particulate (TSP) and inhalable particulates (PM_10) concentrations. The obtained results show promising potential. Although there were under-predictions and over-predictions on some occasions, the neural network models, in general were able to generate the missing information and to obtain air quality situation in the study area.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".