The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An ensemble-based model of PM2.5 concentration across the contiguous United States with high spatiotemporal resolution
Open accessAbstract
Various approaches have been proposed to model PM 2.5 in the recent decade, with satellite-derived aerosol optical depth, land-use variables, chemical transport model predictions, and several meteorological variables as major predictor variables. Our study used an ensemble model that integrated multiple machine learning algorithms and predictor variables to estimate daily PM 2.5 at a resolution of 1 km × 1 km across the contiguous United States. We used a generalized additive model that accounted for geographic difference to combine PM 2.5 estimates from neural network, random forest, and gradient boosting. The three machine learning algorithms were based on multiple predictor variables, including satellite data, meteorological variables, land-use variables, elevation, chemical transport model predictions, several reanalysis datasets, and others. The model training results from 2000 to 2015 indicated good model performance with a 10-fold cross-validated R 2 of 0.86 for daily PM 2.5 predictions. For annual PM 2.5 estimates, the cross-validated R 2 was 0.89. Our model demonstrated good performance up to 60 μg/m 3 . Using trained PM 2.5 model and predictor variables, we predicted daily PM 2.5 from 2000 to 2015 at every 1 km × 1 km grid cell in the contiguous United States. We also used localized land-use variables within 1 km × 1 km grids to downscale PM 2.5 predictions to 100 m × 100 m grid cells. To characterize uncertainty, we used meteorological variables, land-use variables, and elevation to model the monthly standard deviation of the difference between daily monitored and predicted PM 2.5 for every 1 km × 1 km grid cell. This PM 2.5 prediction dataset, including the downscaled and uncertainty predictions, allows epidemiologists to accurately estimate the adverse health effect of PM 2.5 . Compared with model performance of individual base learners, an ensemble model would achieve a better overall estimation. It is worth exploring other ensemble model formats to synthesize estimations from different models or from different groups to improve overall performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition
Bishop, C. M. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198538493.001.0001 · Cited by 12,287
Cohen, A. J., Brauer, M., Burnett, R., Anderson, H. R., Frostad, J., Estep, K., Balakrishnan, K., Brunekreef, B., Dandona, L., Dandona, R., et al. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30505-6 · Cited by 6,583
Pope, C. A., Burnett, R. T., Thurston, G. D., Thun, M. J., Calle, E. E., Krewski, D., & Godleski, J. J. (2004) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000108927.80044.7f · Cited by 2,592 · cited 1×
“…(Seaton et al., 1995; Cohen et al., 2017), and is associated with multiple adverse health outcomes, including mortality (Di et al., 2017), morbidity (Lippmann et al., 2000), cardiovascular disease (Pope, 2003), Accurate estimation of PM 2.5 is a prerequisite of related epidemiological analyses.”
BackgroundInfluentialAir pollution and mortality in the Medicare population
Di, Q., Wang, Y., Zanobetti, A., Wang, Y., Koutrakis, P., Choirat, C., Dominici, F., & Schwartz, J. D. (2017) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1702747 · Cited by 1,510
Cited by
Monthly Global Estimates of Fine Particulate Matter and Their Uncertainty
van Donkelaar, A., Hammer, M. S., Bindle, L., Brauer, M., Brook, J. R., Garay, M. J., Hsu, N. C., Kalashnikova, O. V., Kahn, R. A., Lee, C., et al. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c05309 · Cited by 747
Self-citationShi, L., Steenland, K., Li, H., Liu, P., Zhang, Y., Lyles, R. H., Requia, W. J., Ilango, S. D., Chang, H. H., Wingo, T., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27049-2 · Cited by 239
Self-citationYu, W., Ye, T., Zhang, Y., Xu, R., Lei, Y., Chen, Z., Yang, Z., Zhang, Y., Song, J., Yue, X., et al. (2023) · The Lancet Planetary Health · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(23)00008-6 · Cited by 215
Shi, L., Zhu, Q., Wang, Y., Hao, H., Zhang, H., Schwartz, J., Amini, H., van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R. V., Steenland, K., et al. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2211282119 · Cited by 145
Self-citationAir Pollution and Mortality at the Intersection of Race and Social Class
Josey, K. P., Delaney, S. W., Wu, X., Nethery, R. C., DeSouza, P., Braun, D., & Dominici, F. (2023) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa2300523 · Cited by 142
Metadata
- Authors
- Di, Q., Amini, H., Shi, L., Kloog, I., Silvern, R., Kelly, J., Sabath, M. B., Choirat, C., Koutrakis, P., Lyapustin, A., Wang, Y., Mickley, L. J., & Schwartz, J.
- Venue
- Environment International
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-09
- Volume
- 130
- Pages
- 104909
- ISSN
- 0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2954586028
- Cited by
- 733
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 28.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An ensemble-based model of PM2.5 concentration across the contiguous United States with high spatiotemporal resolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envint.2019.104909
- The paper
- Di, Q., Amini, H., Shi, L., Kloog, I., Silvern, R., Kelly, J., Sabath, M. B., Choirat, C., Koutrakis, P., Lyapustin, A., Wang, Y., Mickley, L. J., & Schwartz, J. (2019). An ensemble-based model of PM2.5 concentration across the contiguous United States with high spatiotemporal resolution. Environment International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.104909
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.