A Data-Fusion Approach to Assessing the Contribution of Wildland Fire Smoke to Fine Particulate Matter in California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The escalating frequency and severity of global wildfires necessitate an in-depth understanding and monitoring of wildfire smoke impacts, specifically its contribution to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). We propose a data-fusion method to study wildfire contribution to PM2.5 using satellite-derived smoke plume indicators and PM2.5 monitoring data. Our study incorporates two types of monitoring data, the high-quality but sparse Air Quality System (AQS) stations and the abundant but less accurate PurpleAir (PA) sensors that are gaining popularity among citizen scientists. We propose a multi-resolution spatiotemporal model specified in the spectral domain to calibrate the PA sensors against accurate AQS measurements, and leverage the two networks to estimate wildfire contribution to PM2.5 in California in 2020 and 2021. A Bayesian approach is taken to incorporate all uncertainties and our prior intuition that the dependence between networks, as well as the accuracy of PA network, vary by frequency. We find that 1% to 3% increase in PM2.5 concentration due to wildfire smoke, and that leveraging PA sensors improves accuracy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".