Cargando…

An Ensemble Spatiotemporal Model for Predicting PM(2.5) Concentrations

Although fine particulate matter with a diameter of <2.5 μm (PM(2.5)) has a greater negative impact on human health than particulate matter with a diameter of <10 μm (PM(10)), measurements of PM(2.5) have only recently been performed, and the spatial coverage of these measurements is limited....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Lianfa, Zhang, Jiehao, Qiu, Wenyang, Wang, Jinfeng, Fang, Ying
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5451999/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28531151
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050549
Descripción
Sumario:Although fine particulate matter with a diameter of <2.5 μm (PM(2.5)) has a greater negative impact on human health than particulate matter with a diameter of <10 μm (PM(10)), measurements of PM(2.5) have only recently been performed, and the spatial coverage of these measurements is limited. Comprehensively assessing PM(2.5) pollution levels and the cumulative health effects is difficult because PM(2.5) monitoring data for prior time periods and certain regions are not available. In this paper, we propose a promising approach for robustly predicting PM(2.5) concentrations. In our approach, a generalized additive model is first used to quantify the non-linear associations between predictors and PM(2.5), the bagging method is used to sample the dataset and train different models to reduce the bias in prediction, and the variogram for the daily residuals of the ensemble predictions is then simulated to improve our predictions. Shandong Province, China, is the study region, and data from 96 monitoring stations were included. To train and validate the models, we used PM(2.5) measurement data from 2014 with other predictors, including PM(10) data, meteorological parameters, remote sensing data, and land-use data. The validation results revealed that the R(2) value was improved and reached 0.89 when PM(10) was used as a predictor and a kriging interpolation was performed for the residuals. However, when PM(10) was not used as a predictor, our method still achieved a CV R(2) value of up to 0.86. The ensemble of spatial characteristics of relevant factors explained approximately 32% of the variance and improved the PM(2.5) predictions. The spatiotemporal modeling approach to estimating PM(2.5) concentrations presented in this paper has important implications for assessing PM(2.5) exposure and its cumulative health effects.