Calibrations of Low-Cost Air Pollution Monitoring Sensors for CO, NO2, O3, and SO2

被引:51
|
作者
Han, Pengfei [1 ]
Mei, Han [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Di [1 ]
Zeng, Ning [3 ,4 ]
Tang, Xiao [2 ]
Wang, Yinghong [2 ]
Pan, Yuepeng [2 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Atmospher Phys, State Key Lab Numer Modeling Atmospher Sci & Geop, Beijing 100029, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Atmospher Phys, State Key Lab Atmospher Boundary Layer Phys & Atm, Beijing 100029, Peoples R China
[3] Univ Maryland, Dept Atmospher & Ocean Sci, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
[4] Univ Maryland, Earth Syst Sci Interdisciplinary Ctr, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
基金
国家重点研发计划; 中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
low-cost gas sensors; electrochemical air quality sensors; field evaluation; single and multiple linear regression; random forest; LSTMs; environmental factors; CHINA; PM2.5; PERFORMANCE; LOCATION; EXPOSURE; TRENDS; MODEL;
D O I
10.3390/s21010256
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Pollutant gases, such as CO, NO2, O-3, and SO2 affect human health, and low-cost sensors are an important complement to regulatory-grade instruments in pollutant monitoring. Previous studies focused on one or several species, while comprehensive assessments of multiple sensors remain limited. We conducted a 12-month field evaluation of four Alphasense sensors in Beijing and used single linear regression (SLR), multiple linear regression (MLR), random forest regressor (RFR), and neural network (long short-term memory (LSTM)) methods to calibrate and validate the measurements with nearby reference measurements from national monitoring stations. For performances, CO > O-3 > NO2 > SO2 for the coefficient of determination (R-2) and root mean square error (RMSE). The MLR did not increase the R-2 after considering the temperature and relative humidity influences compared with the SLR (with R-2 remaining at approximately 0.6 for O-3 and 0.4 for NO2). However, the RFR and LSTM models significantly increased the O-3, NO2, and SO2 performances, with the R-2 increasing from 0.3-0.5 to >0.7 for O-3 and NO2, and the RMSE decreasing from 20.4 to 13.2 ppb for NO2. For the SLR, there were relatively larger biases, while the LSTMs maintained a close mean relative bias of approximately zero (e.g., <5% for O-3 and NO2), indicating that these sensors combined with the LSTMs are suitable for hot spot detection. We highlight that the performance of LSTM is better than that of random forest and linear methods. This study assessed four electrochemical air quality sensors and different calibration models, and the methodology and results can benefit assessments of other low-cost sensors.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 18
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Calibration of CO, NO2, and O3 Using Airify: A Low-Cost Sensor Cluster for Air Quality Monitoring
    Ionascu, Marian-Emanuel
    Castell, Nuria
    Boncalo, Oana
    Schneider, Philipp
    Darie, Marius
    Marcu, Marius
    [J]. SENSORS, 2021, 21 (23)
  • [2] Raw data collected from NO2, O 3 and NO air pollution electrochemical low-cost sensors
    Ferrer-Cid, Pau
    Barcelo-Ordinas, Jose M.
    Garcia-Vidal, Jorge
    [J]. DATA IN BRIEF, 2022, 45
  • [3] Differentiating NO2 and O3 at Low Cost Air Quality Amperometric Gas Sensors
    Hossain, Marlene
    Saffell, John
    Baron, Ronan
    [J]. ACS SENSORS, 2016, 1 (11): : 1291 - 1294
  • [4] Development of low-cost air quality stations for next-generation monitoring networks: calibration and validation of NO2 and O3 sensors
    Cavaliere, Alice
    Brilli, Lorenzo
    Andreini, Bianca Patrizia
    Carotenuto, Federico
    Gioli, Beniamino
    Giordano, Tommaso
    Stefanelli, Marco
    Vagnoli, Carolina
    Zaldei, Alessandro
    Gualtieri, Giovanni
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, 2023, 16 (20) : 4723 - 4740
  • [5] Comparative Evaluation of Low-Cost CO2 Sensors for Indoor Air Pollution Monitoring
    Bose, Rishikesh
    Parmar, Ayu
    Narla, Harsha
    Chaudhari, Sachin
    [J]. 2022 IEEE 8TH WORLD FORUM ON INTERNET OF THINGS, WF-IOT, 2022,
  • [6] Dial measurements of SO2, NO2, and O3 in Beijing
    Zhang, YC
    Hu, HL
    Tan, K
    Liu, XQ
    Shao, SS
    Yang, GC
    Deng, M
    Zhang, GY
    Yang, LJ
    [J]. 22ND INTERNATIONAL LASER RADAR CONFERENCE (ILRC 2004), VOLS 1 AND 2, 2004, 561 : 721 - 724
  • [7] The change in O3, SO2 and NO2 concentrations in Lithuania
    Girgzdiene, R
    Sopauskiene, D
    Girgzdys, A
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2002, : 3 - 7
  • [8] The change in O3, SO2 and NO2 concentrations in Lithuania
    Girgzdiene, Rasa
    Sopauskiene, Dalia
    Girgzdys, Aloyzas
    [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2002, 9 (Suppl 1) : 3 - 7
  • [9] Calibrating low-cost sensors to measure vertical and horizontal gradients of NO2 and O3 pollution in three street canyons in Berlin
    Schmitz, Sean
    Villena, Guillermo
    Caseiro, Alexandre
    Meier, Fred
    Kerschbaumer, Andreas
    von Schneidemesser, Erika
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2023, 307
  • [10] Intelligent forecaster of concentrations (PM2.5, PM10, NO2, CO, O3, SO2) caused air pollution (IFCsAP)
    Al-Janabi, Samaher
    Alkaim, Ayad
    Al-Janabi, Ehab
    Aljeboree, Aseel
    Mustafa, M.
    [J]. NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS, 2021, 33 (21): : 14199 - 14229