Development and validation of satellite-derived surface NO <sub>2</sub> estimates using machine learning versus traditional approaches in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) is one of the key pollutants with profound implications for air quality, and human health, and is needed to establish the air quality health index (AQHI). Currently, over 600 surface air monitoring stations are distributed across Canada and the United States measuring NO 2 , but many areas remain unmonitored leading to incomplete information for health risk assessments. This study leverages Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) satellite observations and machine learning models to derive high-resolution surface NO 2 concentrations, provides enhanced spatial coverage and accuracy, revealing urban-rural NO 2 gradients across North America. Existing traditional methods rely on scaling with modeled profiles to obtain NO 2 surface concentrations from satellite observations. Here, we compare this traditional method to a machine learning approach that utilizes NO 2 observations from TROPOMI, together with meteorological parameters, land cover type, topography, and emission inventories. Our results show that the machine learning (using random forest) yields less bias between the surface monitoring measurements and the “satellite-derived” surface concentrations, significantly improved the correlation coefficient ( R 2 ∼ 0.77–0.91) compared to the traditional method ( R 2 ∼ 0.39–0.57) and yields to significantly less bias.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".