Spatiotemporal Air Pollution Forecasting in Houston-TX: A Case Study for Ozone Using Deep Graph Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of pollutants in our atmosphere has become one of humanity’s greatest challenges. These pollutants, produced primarily by burning fossil fuels, are detrimental to human health, our climate and agriculture. This work proposes the use of a spatiotemporal graph neural network, designed to forecast ozone concentration based on the GraphSAGE paradigm, to aid in our understanding of the dynamic nature of these pollutants’ production and proliferation in urban areas. This model was trained and tested using data from Houston, Texas, the United States, with varying numbers of time-lags, forecast horizons (1, 3, 6 h ahead), input data and nearby stations. The results show that the proposed GNN-SAGE model successfully recognized spatiotemporal patterns underlying these data, bolstering its forecasting performance when compared with a benchmarking persistence model by 33.7%, 48.7% and 57.1% for 1, 3 and 6 h forecast horizons, respectively. The proposed model produces error levels lower than we could find in the existing literature. The conclusions drawn from variable importance SHAP analysis also revealed that when predicting ozone, solar radiation becomes relevant as the forecast time horizon is raised. According to EPA regulation, the model also determined nonattainment conditions for the reference station.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".