Attribution of fine particulate matter and ozone health impacts in Canada to domestic and US emission sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to ambient air pollution is associated with a wide range of adverse health effects such as respiratory symptoms, cardiovascular events, and premature mortality. Canada and the United States (US) have worked collaboratively for decades to address transboundary air pollution and its impacts across their shared border. To inform transboundary air quality considerations, we conducted modelling to attribute health impacts from ambient PM2.5 and O3 exposure in Canada to Canadian and US emission sources. We employed emissions, chemical transport, and health impacts modelling for 2015, 2025, and 2035 using a brute-force modelling approach whereby anthropogenic domestic and US emissions were reduced separately by 20 % or 100 %, and the resulting changes in health impacts were estimated across Canada. We find that transboundary PM2.5 and O3 related health impacts vary widely by region, with >80 % of impacts occurring in Central Canada, and most health impacts occurring within 200–300 km of the Canada-US border. The relative contribution of US sources to O3 in Canada is larger than for PM2.5, yet we find that the health impacts from transboundary PM2.5 exceeded those from transboundary O3. Nationally, we estimate that roughly one in five PM2.5 deaths in Canada is attributable to US sources (2000 deaths in 2015) and more than one in two O3 deaths are attributable to US sources (roughly 800 to 1200 deaths in 2015). We project health impacts from domestic and US sources to increase from 2025 to 2035 in Canada. Our results suggest that there are substantial benefits to be gained by domestic and international strategies to reduce PM2.5 in the Canada-US transboundary region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".