2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.08.044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bayesian inference for source determination with applications to a complex urban environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
190
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 262 publications
(192 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
190
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, as it is computationally expensive, an efficient sampling technique is required to approximate the posterior distribution. Within the literature on STE, several techniques have been used: i) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) (Keats et al (2007); Senocak et al (2008)); ii) sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) (Johannesson et al (2005)); and iii) differential evolution Monte Carlo (DEMC) (Robins et al (2009)). In this work, we use the Metropolis-Hastings MCMC algorithm (Hastings (1970)).…”
Section: Inferencementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, as it is computationally expensive, an efficient sampling technique is required to approximate the posterior distribution. Within the literature on STE, several techniques have been used: i) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) (Keats et al (2007); Senocak et al (2008)); ii) sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) (Johannesson et al (2005)); and iii) differential evolution Monte Carlo (DEMC) (Robins et al (2009)). In this work, we use the Metropolis-Hastings MCMC algorithm (Hastings (1970)).…”
Section: Inferencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most popular approach to STE features a static network of concentration sensors spread over a large region on the ground. Source estimation is then carried out using optimization (Long et al (2010); Thomson et al (2007)) or Bayesian inference algorithms (Keats et al (2007); Senocak et al (2008)) where inferred source parameters are run in a forward ATD model to generate predicted concentrations that are then compared with the data using a cost or likelihood function. A recent study by Platt and Deriggi (2010) based on data from the FFT07 experiment demonstrated some of the limitations of theses approaches when applied to real data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The preferred alternative is the use of Bayesian techniques; they result in the posterior probability density function (PDF) of the source parameter vector, thereby providing an uncertainty measure to any point estimate derived from it. Most Bayesian methods for source estimation are based on Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) technique, assuming either Gaussian or log-Gausiian likelihood function of measurements [5,6,7,8]. Recently, a likelihood-free Bayesian method for source localisation was proposed in [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several recent event reconstruction studies have favored the Bayesian inference approach over the optimization approach as it offers several advantages (Johannesson et al, 2004;Chow et al, 2006;Keats et al, 2007). The main distinguishing feature of the Bayesian inference method is that it estimates probability distributions for parameters of interest and quantifies the uncertainty in the estimated parameter, whereas an optimization method provides point estimates for the parameters of interest through maximizing or minimizing an objective function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results have shown that significant gains in computational time can be obtained by adopting the new scheme over direct sampling. Keats et al (2007) considered a source-receptor relationship within the Bayesian inference method to reduce the overall computation time for source determination. An adjoint equation for the contaminant concentration was solved for that purpose.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%