ArticleScientific reports2026
Applicability analysis of tree-based ensemble learning for air pollutant prediction models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Abstract
To support coordinated air quality management, this study developed a tree-based machine learning framework for multi-pollutant forecasting. We systematically evaluated the predictive performance of Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting Decision Tree (GBDT), and Decision Tree (DT) models for six key pollutants: PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, CO, and O3, using high-resolution environmental monitoring data (10 km resolution) from China’s four major municipalities (2021–2024). A comprehensive feature system was constructed incorporating meteorology-emission interaction terms. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were employed to quantify feature contributions. Key findings demonstrate: (1) RF achieved optimal performance in particulate matter prediction (PM2.5: R2 = 0.99, RMSE = 0.11 µg/m3; PM10: R2 = 0.98); (2) GBDT showed comparable accuracy to RF for NO2 (R2 = 0.85) and CO (R2 = 0.98) with minimal differences (ΔR2 ≤ 0.03); (3) DT exhibited competitive O3 prediction capability (R2 = 0.88). SHAP analysis revealed critical mechanisms, such as CO’s positive synergistic effect (SHAP = 0.136) in PM2.5 prediction and O3 generation sensitivity to temperature (SHAP = 0.076). This research provides an interpretable, multi-pollutant forecasting framework applicable to urban air quality warning systems and offers model selection guidance for environmental regulation strategies.
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.