Development of ASTM International D8405—Standard Test Method for Evaluating PM <sub>2.5</sub> Sensors or Sensor Systems Used in Indoor Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensors and sensor systems for monitoring fine particles with aerodynamic diameters smaller than 2.5 µm can provide real-time feedback on indoor air quality and thus can help guide actions to manage indoor air pollutant concentrations. Standardized verification of the performance and accuracy of sensors and sensor systems is crucial for predicting the efficacy of such monitoring. A new ASTM International standard test method (ASTM D8405) was created for this need and is the most exacting laboratory protocol published to date for evaluating indoor air quality sensors and sensor systems measuring particles smaller than 2.5 µm in diameter. ASTM D8405 subjects sensors and sensor systems to five test phases: (1) an initial particle concentration ramp; (2) exposure to various temperature and humidity conditions; (3) exposure to interfering particles; (4) temperature cycling; and (5) a final particle concentration ramp to assess drift. This paper discusses the development of the standard test method, key aspects of the testing process, example evaluation results, and a comparison of this standard test method against peer evaluation protocols.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".