Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network

被引:34
|
作者
Considine, Ellen M. [1 ]
Reid, Colleen E. [2 ]
Ogletree, Michael R. [3 ]
Dye, Timothy [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Colorado Boulder, Dept Appl Math, Boulder, CO USA
[2] Univ Colorado Boulder, Dept Geog, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
[3] Denver Dept Publ Hlth & Environm, Denver, CO USA
[4] TD Environm Serv LLC, Petaluma, CA USA
关键词
Air pollution; Low-cost sensor; Machine learning; On-the-fly calibration; Plantower sensor; Cross-validation; CALIBRATION MODEL; FIELD-EVALUATION; PERFORMANCE; ALGORITHMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115833
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Low-cost air quality sensors can help increase spatial and temporal resolution of air pollution exposure measurements. These sensors, however, most often produce data of lower accuracy than higher-end instruments. In this study, we investigated linear and random forest models to correct PM2.5 measurements from the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment (DDPHE)'s network of low-cost sensors against measurements from co-located U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Federal Equivalence Method (FEM) monitors. Our training set included data from five DDPHE sensors from August 2018 through May 2019. Our testing set included data from two newly deployed DDPHE sensors from September 2019 through mid-December 2019. In addition to PM2.5, temperature, and relative humidity from the low-cost sensors, we explored using additional temporal and spatial variables to capture unexplained variability in sensor measurements. We evaluated results using spatial and temporal cross-validation techniques. For the long-term dataset, a random forest model with all time-varying covariates and length of arterial roads within 500 m was the most accurate (testing RMSE = 2.9 mg/m(3) and R-2 = 0.75; leave-one-location-out (LOLO)-validation metrics on the training set: RMSE = 2.2 mg/m(3) and R-2 = 0.93). For on-the-fly correction, we found that a multiple linear regression model using the past eight weeks of low-cost sensor PM2.5, temperature, and humidity data plus a near-highway indicator predicted each new week of data best (testing RMSE = 3.1 mu g/m(3) and R-2 = 0.78; LOLO-validation metrics on the training set: RMSE = 2.3 mg/m(3) and R-2 = 0.90). The statistical methods detailed here will be used to correct low-cost sensor measurements to better understand PM2.5 pollution within the city of Denver. This work can also guide similar implementations in other municipalities by highlighting the improved accuracy from inclusion of variables other than temperature and relative humidity to improve accuracy of low-cost sensor PM2.5 data. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Preliminary research for low-cost particulate matter sensor network
    Bathory, Csongor
    Kiss, Marton L.
    Trohak, Attila
    Dobo, Zsolt
    Palotas, Arpad Bence
    [J]. 11TH CONFERENCE ON INTERDISCIPLINARY PROBLEMS IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ENGINEERING (EKO-DOK 2019), 2019, 100
  • [2] Improving the Accuracy of Low-Cost Sensor Measurements for Freezer Automation
    Koritsoglou, Kyriakos
    Christou, Vasileios
    Ntritsos, Georgios
    Tsoumanis, Georgios
    Tsipouras, Markos G.
    Giannakeas, Nikolaos
    Tzallas, Alexandros T.
    [J]. SENSORS, 2020, 20 (21) : 1 - 16
  • [3] DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW-COST SENSOR NETWORK FOR COMMUNITY-MADE MEASUREMENTS OF AIR POLLUTION
    Sandoval Campos, Sebastian
    Ballesteros Higuera, Fabian A.
    Roa Prada, Sebastian
    Caceres Becerra, Claudia I.
    Diaz Claro, Alfredo A.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME 2020 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CONGRESS AND EXPOSITION, IMECE2020, VOL 6, 2020,
  • [4] Effects of Road Traffic on the Accuracy and Bias of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor Measurements in Houston, Texas
    Oluwadairo, Temitope
    Whitehead, Lawrence
    Symanski, Elaine
    Bauer, Cici
    Carson, Arch
    Han, Inkyu
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (03)
  • [5] Low-Cost Sensor Node for Air Quality Monitoring: Field Tests and Validation of Particulate Matter Measurements
    Schilt, Ueli
    Barahona, Braulio
    Buck, Roger
    Meyer, Patrick
    Kappani, Prince
    Mockli, Yannis
    Meyer, Markus
    Schuetz, Philipp
    [J]. SENSORS, 2023, 23 (02)
  • [6] Statistical issues in the study of air pollution involving airborne particulate matter
    Cox, LH
    [J]. ENVIRONMETRICS, 2000, 11 (06) : 611 - 626
  • [7] Spatiotemporal distribution of indoor particulate matter concentration with a low-cost sensor network
    Li, Jiayu
    Li, Haoran
    Ma, Yehan
    Wang, Yang
    Abokifa, Ahmed A.
    Lu, Chenyang
    Biswas, Pratim
    [J]. BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2018, 127 : 138 - 147
  • [8] Indoor Household Particulate Matter Measurements Using a Network of Low-cost Sensors
    Hegde, Shruti
    Min, Kyeong T.
    Moore, James
    Lundrigan, Philip
    Patwari, Neal
    Collingwood, Scott
    Balch, Alfred
    Kelly, Kerry E.
    [J]. AEROSOL AND AIR QUALITY RESEARCH, 2020, 20 (02) : 381 - 394
  • [9] A new calibration system for low-cost Sensor Network in air pollution monitoring
    Cui, Houxin
    Zhang, Ling
    Li, Wanxin
    Yuan, Ziyang
    Wu, Mengxian
    Wang, Chunying
    Ma, Jingjin
    Li, Yi
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2021, 12 (05)
  • [10] Size-Resolved Field Performance of Low-Cost Sensors for Particulate Matter Air Pollution
    Rueda, Emilio Molina
    Carter, Ellison
    L'Orange, Christian
    Quinn, Casey
    Volckens, John
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LETTERS, 2023, 10 (03): : 247 - 253