MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405987634 · doi:10.1080/10962247.2024.2447458

Incorporation of RLINE into AERMOD: An update and evaluation for mobile source applications

2025· article· en· W4405987634 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBluetooth and Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsWSP (Canada)
FundersOak Ridge Institute for Science and EducationFederal Highway AdministrationOffice of Research and DevelopmentU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsAERMODEnvironmental scienceWaste managementComputer scienceEngineeringAir pollutionChemistryAtmospheric dispersion modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The R-LINE model, which was released in 2013 as a stand-alone model for roadway-type applications and was based on a set of newly developed dispersion curves, exhibited favorable model performance in a limited set of evaluations (Heist et. al, 2013, Snyder et al. Citation2013, Venkatram et al. Citation2013). In 2019, the R-LINE model was incorporated as the RLINE source type in EPA’s preferred near-field dispersion model AERMOD. Since its inclusion in AERMOD, the RLINE source type has been tested and compared to other AERMOD source types using multiple data sets and transportation studies. The outcome of these tests is a need to revisit the dispersion parameters used in the original RLINE dispersion curves to address performance issues suggested by comparisons to AREA and VOLUME source types in AERMOD. The work presented here includes corrections to the RLINE vertical wind profiling, harmonization of several aspects of the RLINE formulation with AERMOD’s AREA and VOLUME source types (i.e. the addition of terrain and meander weighting), and updates to the RLINE dispersion parameterization based on a computational optimization routine. The updated RLINE source type is compared with AREA and VOLUME estimates for two hot-spot transportation studies. RLINE modeled estimates are also reevaluated with two of the previous evaluation studies and two additional tracer studies. The updated RLINE formulation leads to improved performance in most cases and closer comparison with the AREA and VOLUME sources.Implication Statement The RLINE source type was recently added by the EPA to the AERMOD model as a “preferred” model option. Thus, the RLINE source type is now available to the air quality modeling community as a modeling option without any approval required. This paper explains recent changes to the model formulation and provides both an updated and expanded model evaluation. For the updated evaluation, we compare the three AERMOD source types (RLINE, AREA, and VOLUME) for two tracer databases used when the RLINE source was initially created (Caltrans 99 and Idaho Falls). We also add model evaluations for two “new” databases (GM Sulfate and Berkeley Freeway Experiment) to expand the assessments of model performance. Additionally, two model intercomparisons are examined, comparing design concentrations for two real-world highway hot-spot projects for RLINE against the AREA and VOLUME sources, which shows much better agreement between the three source types with the updated RLINE model. The work is essential for dispersion model practitioners to understand the specifics of RLINE’s model formulation as well as its performance against the other two AERMOD source types typically used for modeling roadway emissions.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.263 · 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