2018
DOI: 10.5194/acp-18-6223-2018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Random forest meteorological normalisation models for Swiss PM<sub>10</sub> trend analysis

Abstract: Abstract. Meteorological normalisation is a technique which accounts for changes in meteorology over time in an air quality time series. Controlling for such changes helps support robust trend analysis because there is more certainty that the observed trends are due to changes in emissions or chemistry, not changes in meteorology. Predictive random forest models (RF; a decision tree machine learning technique) were grown for 31 air quality monitoring sites in Switzerland using surface meteorological, synoptic … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
264
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 299 publications
(277 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
12
264
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The PD of BLH shows that the model is able to reproduce the pattern of decreasing particle concentrations with increasing BLH (Gupta & Christopher, ; Wagner & Schäfer, ).The shape of the full‐year PD of BLH shown in Figure a is similar to that provided by Grange et al () for observations in Switzerland. They found a reduction of 8 μg/m 3 for daily PM10 predictions.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The PD of BLH shows that the model is able to reproduce the pattern of decreasing particle concentrations with increasing BLH (Gupta & Christopher, ; Wagner & Schäfer, ).The shape of the full‐year PD of BLH shown in Figure a is similar to that provided by Grange et al () for observations in Switzerland. They found a reduction of 8 μg/m 3 for daily PM10 predictions.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…This tendency was reduced by the choice of the least squares loss function as describes in chapter 2.5.3 but likely still continues to affect the model accuracy. The model performance is comparable to similar studies, also in its underestimation of PM (Hu et al, ; Grange et al, ; Stafoggia et al, ; Zhang et al, ). Tenfold random train/test splits were conducted, resulting in 10 models.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 3 more Smart Citations