MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Air Pollution Forecasting Using Machine Learning with Temporal Fusion Transformer and Graph Neural Networks

2025· article· en· W4408399781 on OpenAlexaff
Subhashree Rath, P. Maneesha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTransformerArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningGraphEngineeringElectrical engineeringTheoretical computer scienceVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air pollution is a significant obstacle to achieving urban sustainability and public health, particularly in rapidly developing regions. Accurate air quality prediction is essential for proactive pollution management and policy formulation. In this study, we employ sophisticated machine learning frameworks, such as Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) and Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), to predict air quality levels. TFT is designed to capture temporal dependencies, making it ideal for time-series forecasting, while GNNs model spatial relationships, enabling the analysis of pollutant dispersion across monitoring stations. A synthetic dataset comprising 50 rows was generated, simulating pollutant concentrations (PM2.5, PM10, CO, NO2, SO2) and meteorological variables (temperature, humidity, wind speed). The models were assessed using criteria like <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$R^{2}$</tex>, RMSE, and MAE. TFT achieved an <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$R^{2}$</tex> of 0.97 and an RMSE of <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$4.2 \mu ~\mathrm{g} / \mathrm{m}^3$</tex>, significantly outperforming traditional models like Random Forest and XGBoost. GNN provided spatial insights, identifying pollutant hotspots and their dispersion patterns. This research highlights the superior accuracy and scalability of TFT and GNN for air quality prediction. The results underline their potential for real-time monitoring, smart city integration, and proactive environmental management, offering a robust solution for addressing urban air pollution challenges.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207