An Improved Air Quality Index Machine Learning-Based Forecasting with Multivariate Data Imputation Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate, timely air quality index (AQI) forecasting helps industries in selecting the most suitable air pollution control measures and the public in reducing harmful exposure to pollution. This article proposes a comprehensive method to forecast AQIs. Initially, the work focused on predicting hourly ambient concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10 using artificial neural networks. Once the method was developed, the work was extended to the prediction of other criteria pollutants, i.e., O3, SO2, NO2, and CO, which fed into the process of estimating AQI. The prediction of the AQI not only requires the selection of a robust forecasting model, it also heavily relies on a sequence of pre-processing steps to select predictors and handle different issues in data, including gaps. The presented method dealt with this by imputing missing entries using missForest, a machine learning-based imputation technique which employed the random forest (RF) algorithm. Unlike the usual practice of using RF at the final forecasting stage, we utilized RF at the data pre-processing stage, i.e., missing data imputation and feature selection, and we obtained promising results. The effectiveness of this imputation method was examined against a linear imputation method for the six criteria pollutants and the AQI. The proposed approach was validated against ambient air quality observations for Al-Jahra, a major city in Kuwait. Results obtained showed that models trained using missForest-imputed data could generalize AQI forecasting and with a prediction accuracy of 92.41% when tested on new unseen data, which is better than earlier findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".