MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Predicting intraurban airborne PM1.0-trace elements in a port city: Land use regression by ordinary least squares and a machine learning algorithm

2021· article· en· W3197336836 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joyce J.Y. Zhang, Liu Sun, Daniel Rainham, Trevor Dummer, Amanda J. Wheeler, Angelos T. Anastasopolos, Mark Gibson, Markey Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie UniversityHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdinary least squaresEnvironmental sciencePartial least squares regressionPredictive modellingMeteorologyAir pollutionRegression analysisStatisticsLinear regressionAtmospheric sciencesMathematicsGeographyChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne particulate matter (PM) has been associated with cardiovascular and respiratory morbidity and mortality, and there is some evidence that spatially varying metals found in PM may contribute to adverse health effects. We developed spatially refined models for PM trace elements using ordinary least squares land use regression (OLS-LUR) and machine leaning random forest land-use regression (RF-LUR). Two-week integrated measurements of PM1.0 (median aerodiameter < 1.0 μm) were collected at 50 sampling sites during fall (2010), winter (2011), and summer (2011) in the Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia, Canada. PM1.0 filters were analyzed for metals and trace elements using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. OLS- and RF-LUR models were developed for approximately 30 PM1.0 trace elements in each season. Model predictors included industrial, commercial, and institutional/ government/ military land use, roadways, shipping, other transportation sources, and wind rose information. RF generated more accurate models than OLS for most trace elements based on 5-fold cross validation. On average, summer models had the highest cross validation R2 (OLS-LUR = 0.40, RF-LUR = 0.46), while fall had the lowest (OLS-LUR = 0.27, RF-LUR = 0.31). Many OLS-LUR models displayed overprediction in the final exposure surface. In contrast, RF-LUR models did not exhibit overpredictions. Taking overpredictions and cross validation performances into account, OLS-LUR performed better than RF-LUR in roughly 20% of the seasonal trace element models. RF-LUR models provided more interpretable predictors in most cases. Seasonal predictors varied, likely due to differences in seasonal distribution of trace elements related to source activity, and meteorology.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total Environment→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→