Factors influencing ambient particulate matter in Delhi, India: Insights from machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concentrations of ambient particulate matter (PM) depend on various factors including emissions of primary pollutants, meteorology and chemical transformations. New Delhi, India is the most polluted megacity in the world and routinely experiences extreme pollution episodes. As part of the Delhi Aerosol Supersite study, we measured online continuous PM1 (particulate matter of size less than 1 μm) concentrations and composition for over five years starting January 2017, using an Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM). Here, we describe the development and application of machine learning models using random forest regression to estimate the concentrations, composition, sources and dynamics of PM in Delhi. These models estimate PM1 species concentrations based on meteorological parameters including ambient temperature, relative humidity, planetary boundary layer height, wind speed, wind direction, precipitation, agricultural burning fire counts, solar radiation and cloud cover. We used hour of day, day of week and month of year as proxies for time-dependent emissions (e.g., emissions from traffic during rush hours). We demonstrate the applicability of these models to capture temporal variability of the PM1 species, to understand the influence of individual factors via sensitivity analyses, and to separate impacts of the COVID-19 lockdowns and associated activity restrictions from impacts of other factors. Our models provide new insights into the factors influencing ambient PM1 in New Delhi, India, demonstrating the power of machine learning models in atmospheric science applications.Copyright © 2023 American Association for Aerosol Research
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; 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".