MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412403633 · doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00486

Air Quality Impacts of the January 2025 Los Angeles Wildfires: Insights from Public Data Sources

2025· article· en· W4412403633 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Schollaert, Rachel Connolly, Lara Cushing, Michael Jerrett, Tianjia Liu, Miriam E. Marlier

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsAir quality indexQuality (philosophy)Environmental scienceData qualityGeographyMeteorologyEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Smoke from the Los Angeles (LA) wildfires that started on January 7, 2025 caused severe air quality impacts across the region. Government agencies released guidance on assessing personal risk, pointing to publicly available data platforms that present information from monitoring networks and smoke plume outlines. Additional satellite-based products provide supporting information during dynamic wildfire smoke events. We evaluate the regional air quality impacts of the fires through publicly available fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) observations from regulatory monitoring stations, PurpleAir low-cost sensors, the TEMPO and TROPOMI satellite sensors, and Hazard Mapping System (HMS) Smoke Plumes during this multifire event. The most extreme air quality impacts were observed on January 8–9, particularly in the southern half of LA county, where daily average PM 2.5 concentrations at the downtown LA regulatory monitor reached 101.7 μg/m 3 and 52.3 μg/m 3 in Compton. On January 8th, 12 PurpleAir sensors located closer to burn areas exceeded daily PM 2.5 concentrations of 225 μg/m 3 . While smoke impacts were largely consistent across all data sources, differences in the spatiotemporal, including vertical, resolution of each product may affect interpretability for end users. This study underscores the importance of integrating multiple air quality data sources and improving accessibility to enhance public health messaging during wildfire events.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology LettersSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207