ArticleScientific reports2024
Airborne particulate matter measurement and prediction with machine learning techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Air quality is a fundamental component of a healthy environment for human beings. Monitoring networks for air pollution have been established in numerous industrial zones. The data collected by the pervasive monitoring devices can be utilized not only for determining the current environmental condition, but also for forecasting it in the near future. This paper considers the applications of different machine learning methods for the prediction of the two most widely used quantities. Particulate matter (PM) with a diameter of 2.5 and 10 µm, respectively. The data are collected via a proprietary monitoring station, designated as the Ecolumn. The Ecolumn monitors a number of key parameters, including temperature, pressure, humidity, PM 1.0, PM 2.5, and PM 10, in a timely manner. The data were employed in the development of multiple models based on selected machine learning methods. The decision tree, random forest, recurrent neural network, and long short-term memory models were employed. Experiments were conducted with varying hyperparameters and network architectures. Different time scales (10 min, 1 h, and 24 h) were examined. The most optimal results were observed for the Long Short-Term Memory algorithm when utilizing the shortest available time spans (shortest averaging times). The decision tree and random forest algorithms demonstrated unexpectedly high performance for long averaging times, exhibiting only a slight decline in accuracy compared to neural networks for shorter averaging times. Recommendations for the potential applicability of the tested methods were formulated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.