MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402489862 · doi:10.5194/essd-16-4051-2024

PM <sub>2.5</sub> concentrations based on near-surface visibility in the Northern Hemisphere from 1959 to 2022

2024· article· en· W4402489862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongfei Hao, Kaicun Wang, Guocan Wu, Jianbao Liu, Jing Li

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth system science data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsVisibilityNorthern HemisphereEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyMeteorologyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Long-term PM2.5 data are essential for the atmospheric environment, human health, and climate change. PM2.5 measurements are sparsely distributed and of short duration. In this study, daily PM2.5 concentrations are estimated using a machine learning method for the period from 1959 to 2022 in the Northern Hemisphere based on near-surface atmospheric visibility. They are extracted from the Integrated Surface Database (ISD). Daily continuous monitored PM2.5 concentration is set as the target, and near-surface atmospheric visibility and other related variables are used as the inputs. A total of 80 % of the samples of each site are the training set, and 20 % are the testing set. The training result shows that the slope of linear regression with a 95 % confidence interval (CI) between the estimated PM2.5 concentration and the monitored PM2.5 concentration is 0.955 [0.955, 0.955], the coefficient of determination (R2) is 0.95, the root mean square error (RMSE) is 7.2 µg m−3, and the mean absolute error (MAE) is 3.2 µg m−3. The test result shows that the slope within a 95 % CI between the predicted PM2.5 concentration and the monitored PM2.5 concentration is 0.864 [0.863, 0.865], the R2 is 0.79, the RMSE is 14.8 µg m−3, and the MAE is 7.6 µg m−3. Compared with a global PM2.5 concentration dataset derived from a satellite aerosol optical depth product with 1 km resolution, the slopes of linear regression on the daily (monthly) scale are 0.817 (0.854) from 2000 to 2021, 0.758 (0.821) from 2000 to 2010, and 0.867 (0.879) from 2011 to 2022, indicating the accuracy of the model and the consistency of the estimated PM2.5 concentration on the temporal scale. The interannual trends and spatial patterns of PM2.5 concentration on the regional scale from 1959 to 2022 are analyzed using a generalized additive mixed model (GAMM), suitable for situations with an uneven spatial distribution of monitoring sites. The trend is the slope of the Theil–Sen estimator. In Canada, the trend is −0.10 µg m−3 per decade, and the PM2.5 concentration exhibits an east–high to west–low pattern. In the United States, the trend is −0.40 µg m−3 per decade, and PM2.5 concentration decreases significantly after 1992, with a trend of −1.39 µg m−3 per decade. The areas of high PM2.5 concentration are in the east and west, and the areas of low PM2.5 concentration are in the central and northern regions. In Europe, the trend is −1.55 µg m−3 per decade. High-concentration areas are distributed in eastern Europe, and the low-concentration areas are in northern and western Europe. In China, the trend is 2.09 µg m−3 per decade. High- concentration areas are distributed in northern China, and the low-concentration areas are distributed in southern China. The trend is 2.65 µg m−3 per decade up to 2011 and −22.23 µg m−3 per decade since 2012. In India, the trend is 0.92 µg m−3 per decade. The concentration exhibits a north–high to south–low pattern, with high-concentration areas distributed in northern India, such as the Ganges Plain and Thar Desert, and the low-concentration area in the Deccan Plateau. The trend is 1.41 µg m−3 per decade up to 2013 and −23.36 µg m−3 per decade from 2014. The variation in regional PM2.5 concentrations is closely related to the implementation of air quality laws and regulations. The daily site-scale PM2.5 concentration dataset from 1959 to 2022 in the Northern Hemisphere is available at the National Tibetan Plateau/Third Pole Environment Data Center (https://doi.org/10.11888/Atmos.tpdc.301127) (Hao et al., 2024).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth system science dataSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207