MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384945255 · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2023.108106

Predicting spatial variations in annual average outdoor ultrafine particle concentrations in Montreal and Toronto, Canada: Integrating land use regression and deep learning models

2023· article· en· W4384945255 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marshall Lloyd, Arman Ganji, Junshi Xu, Alessya Venuta, Leora Simon, Mingqian Zhang, Milad Saeedi, Shoma Yamanouchi, Joshua S. Apte, Kris Y. Hong, Marianne Hatzopoulou, Scott Weichenthal

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersHealth Effects InstituteU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsUltrafine particleEnvironmental scienceSpatial variabilityAir pollutantsAir pollutionAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeneralized additive modelGeographyStatisticsMathematicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concentrations of outdoor ultrafine particles (UFP; < 0.1 µm) and black carbon (BC) can vary greatly within cities and long-term exposures to these pollutants have been associated with a variety of adverse health outcomes. This study integrated multiple approaches to develop new models to estimate within-city spatial variations in annual median (i.e. average) outdoor UFP and BC concentrations as well as mean UFP size in Canada’s two largest cities, Montreal and Toronto. We conducted year-long mobile monitoring campaigns in each city that included evenings and weekends. We developed generalized additive models trained on land use parameters and deep Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) models trained on satellite-view images. Using predictions from these models, we developed final combined models. In Toronto, the median observed UFP concentration, UFP size, and BC concentration values were 16,172 pt/cm3, 33.7 nm, and 1225 ng/m3, respectively. In Montreal, the median observed UFP concentration, UFP size, and BC concentration values were 14,702 pt/cm3, 29.7 nm, and 1060 ng/m3, respectively. For all pollutants in both cities, the proportion of spatial variation explained (i.e., R2) was slightly greater (1-2 percentage points) for the combined models than the generalized additive models and a greater (approximately 10 percentage points) than the deep CNN models. The Toronto combined model R2 values in the test set were 0.73, 0.55, and 0.61 for UFP concentrations, UFP size, and BC concentration, respectively. The Montreal combined model R2 values were 0.60, 0.49, and 0.60 for UFP concentration, UFP size, and BC concentration models respectively. For each pollutant, predictions from the combined, deep CNN, and generalized additive models were highly correlated with each other and differences between models were explored in sensitivity analyses. Predictions from these models are available to support future epidemiological research examining long-term health impacts of outdoor UFPs and BC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment InternationalSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207