Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39000970›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Parsimonious Random-Forest-Based Land-Use Regression Model Using Particulate Matter Sensors in Berlin, Germany.

Janani Venkatraman Jagatha, Christoph Schneider, Tobias Sauter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Janani Venkatraman JagathaGeography Department, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3609-6986
Christoph SchneiderGeography Department, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9914-3217
Tobias SauterGeography Department, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2232-8096

Funding

Federal Ministry of Education and Research 01LP1602BFederal Ministry of Education and Research 01LP1912B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) methods are widely used in particulate matter prediction modelling, especially through use of air quality sensor data. Despite their advantages, these methods' black-box nature obscures the understanding of how a prediction has been made. Major issues with these types of models include the data quality and computational intensity. In this study, we employed feature selection methods using recursive feature elimination and global sensitivity analysis for a random-forest (RF)-based land-use regression model developed for the city of Berlin, Germany. Land-use-based predictors, including local climate zones, leaf area index, daily traffic volume, population density, building types, building heights, and street types were used to create a baseline RF model. Five additional models, three using recursive feature elimination method and two using a Sobol-based global sensitivity analysis (GSA), were implemented, and their performance was compared against that of the baseline RF model. The predictors that had a large effect on the prediction as determined using both the methods are discussed. Through feature elimination, the number of predictors were reduced from 220 in the baseline model to eight in the parsimonious models without sacrificing model performance. The model metrics were compared, which showed that the parsimonious_GSA-based model performs better than does the baseline model and reduces the mean absolute error (MAE) from 8.69 µg/m

Indexed as

land useparticulate matterrandom forestregression modellingsensitivity analysis

Identifiers

PMID39000970
PMCPMC11244214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.