Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41882001›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Estimation of surface PM

Vivek Singh, Sumit Singh, Nabin Sharma, Amarendra Singh, Aman Srivastava, Atul Kumar Srivastava, Deewan Singh Bisht, Kalpana Patel, Neeti Singh, Mansour Almazroui and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

11 authors.

Vivek SinghIndian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi, 110060, India. vivek.singh@tropmet.res.in.
Sumit SinghIndian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi, 110060, India.
Nabin SharmaDepartment of Physics, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Delhi-NCR Campus, Modinagar, Ghaziabad, 201204, India.
Amarendra SinghCentre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi, 110016, India.
Aman SrivastavaDepartment of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Haridwar, 247667, India.
Atul Kumar SrivastavaIndian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi, 110060, India.
Deewan Singh BishtIndian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi, 110060, India.
Kalpana PatelDepartment of Physics, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Delhi-NCR Campus, Modinagar, Ghaziabad, 201204, India.
Neeti SinghIndia Meteorological Department, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Lodi Road, New Delhi, 110003, India.
Mansour AlmazrouiCentre for Excellence for Climate Change Research/Department of Meteorology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Arti ChoudharyDepartment of Biosciences, School of Physical & Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, Technology & Architecture, Manipal University Jaipur, Jaipur, 303007, India. arti.choudhary@jaipur.manipal.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is a significant air pollutant in the Indo Gangetic Basin (IGB), where levels frequently exceed national and WHO air quality standards. Ground observations from 183 CPCB automatic stations, along with MERRA-2 reanalysis products and meteorological variables, were utilized in this study to analyse PM2.5 characteristics over a recent decade for the period from 2014–2023. A machine learning (ML) framework was developed using Random Forest, Extra Trees, LightGBM, and a stacking ensemble model to improve surface PM2.5 estimation in four major IGB cities: Delhi, Kanpur, Lucknow, and Patna. It is found that the raw MERRA-2 estimates systematically underestimated PM2.5, with R2 values of only 0.28–0.42 and RMSE as high as 82 µg m−3. By contrast, the stacking ensemble achieved R2 values of 0.79–0.82, FAC2 above 0.94, RMSE reduced to 27–31 µg m−3, and near-zero bias (1.7–2.3 µg m−3). The model successfully reproduced extreme winter pollution episodes as well as monsoon conditions, highlighting the critical role of meteorological parameters such as boundary layer height, wind speed, and precipitation in regulating PM2.5 variability. Trajectory clustering and concentration-weighted trajectory (CWT) analysis showed that north-westerly transport contributes 55–65% of wintertime PM2.5 in Delhi, Kanpur, and Lucknow, while Patna is affected by both regional inflows and local sources. Major contributing regions include Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, and the Nepal plains, associated with crop residue burning and dust transport. By integrating ground observations, reanalysis data, meteorological predictors, and atmospheric transport analysis, this study provides a robust framework for improving PM2.5 prediction and identifying dominant pollution sources in the IGB. The results provide scientific evidence for designing both regional and city-specific mitigation strategies to reduce exposure in one of the world’s most polluted and densely populated regions.

Indexed as

Boundary layer heightConcentration-weighted trajectoryDecadal PM2.5Indo Gangetic BasinMachine learningTrajectory clustering

Identifiers

PMID41882001
PMCPMC13129090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.