MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386255540 · doi:10.3390/rs15174246

A Data-Fusion Approach to Assessing the Contribution of Wildland Fire Smoke to Fine Particulate Matter in California

2023· article· en· W4386255540 on OpenAlexaff
Hongjian Yang, Sofía Ruiz‐Suarez, Brian J. Reich, Yawen Guan, Ana G. Rappold

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSmokeLeverage (statistics)ParticulatesAir quality indexRemote sensingMeteorologyComputer scienceMachine learningGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207