Exposure models for particulate matter elemental concentrations in Southern California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to a scarcity of routine monitoring of speciated particulate matter (PM), there has been limited capability to develop exposure models that robustly estimate component-specific concentrations. This paper presents the largest such study conducted in a single urban area. Using samples that were collected at 220 locations over two seasons, quasi-ultrafine (PM0.2), accumulation mode fine (PM0.2-2.5), and coarse (PM2.5-10) particulate matter concentrations were used to develop spatiotemporal regression, machine learning models that enabled predictions of 24 elemental components in eight Southern California communities. We used supervised variable selection of over 150 variables, largely from publicly available sources, including meteorological, roadway and traffic characteristics, land use, and dispersion model estimates of traffic emissions. PM components that have high oxidative potential (and potentially large health effects) or are otherwise important markers for major PM sources were the primary focus. We present results for copper, iron, and zinc (as non-tailpipe vehicle emissions); elemental carbon (diesel emissions); vanadium (ship emissions); calcium (soil dust); and sodium (sea salt). Spatiotemporal linear regression models with 17 to 36 predictor variables including meteorology; distance to different classifications of roads; intersections and off ramps within a given buffer distance; truck and vehicle traffic volumes; and near-roadway dispersion model estimates produced superior predictions over the machine learning approaches (cross validation R-squares ranged from 0.76 to 0.92). Our models are easily interpretable and appear to have more effectively captured spatial gradients in the metallic portion of PM than other comparably large studies, particularly near roadways for the non-tailpipe emissions. Furthermore, we demonstrated the importance of including spatiotemporally resolved meteorology in our models as it helped to provide key insights into spatial patterns and allowed us to make temporal predictions.
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) | 0.052 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".