The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The ChinaHighPM10 dataset: generation, validation, and spatiotemporal variations from 2015 to 2019 across China
Open accessAbstract
Respirable particles with aerodynamic diameters ≤ 10 µm (PM10) have important impacts on the atmospheric environment and human health. Available PM10 datasets have coarse spatial resolutions, limiting their applications, especially at the city level. A tree-based ensemble learning model, which accounts for spatiotemporal information (i.e., space-time extremely randomized trees, denoted as the STET model), is designed to estimate near-surface PM10 concentrations. The 1-km resolution Multi-Angle Implementation of Atmospheric Correction (MAIAC) aerosol product and auxiliary factors, including meteorology, land-use cover, surface elevation, population distribution, and pollutant emissions, are used in the STET model to generate the high-resolution (1 km) and high-quality PM10 dataset for China (i.e., ChinaHighPM10) from 2015 to 2019. The product has an out-of-sample (out-of-station) cross-validation coefficient of determination (CV-R2) of 0.86 (0.82) and a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 24.28 (27.07) μg/m3, outperforming most widely used models from previous related studies. High levels of PM10 concentration occurred in northwest China (e.g., the Tarim Basin) and the Northern China Plain. Overall, PM10 concentrations had a significant declining trend of 5.81 μg/m3 per year (p < 0.001) over the past five years in China, especially in three key urban agglomerations. The ChinaHighPM10 dataset is potentially useful for future small- and medium-scale air pollution studies by virtue of its higher spatial resolution and overall accuracy.
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
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
Sensitivity Analysis of k-Fold Cross Validation in Prediction Error Estimation
Rodriguez, J. D., Perez, A., & Lozano, J. A. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2009.187 · Cited by 1,890 · cited 2×
“In our study, two typical independent 10-fold cross-validation (CV) approaches (Rodriguez et al., 2010) based on all data samples (i.e., out-of-sample validation; Ma et al., 2014) and PM 10 monitoring stations (i. e., out-of-station validation; Wei et al. (2020) are selected to validate the overall…”
Liu, Q., Liu, Y., Yin, J., Zhang, M., & Zhang, T. (2014) · Atmospheric Environment · doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.057 · Cited by 102
Cited by
Wei, J., Liu, S., Li, Z., Liu, C., Qin, K., Liu, X., Pinker, R. T., Dickerson, R. R., Lin, J., Boersma, K. F., et al. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.2c03834 · Cited by 361
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Wei, J., Li, Z., Xue, W., Sun, L., Fan, T., Liu, L., Su, T., & Cribb, M.
- Venue
- Environment International
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 146
- Pages
- 106290
- ISSN
- 0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3111130380
- Cited by
- 511
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 13.74
- 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: The ChinaHighPM10 dataset: generation, validation, and spatiotemporal variations from 2015 to 2019 across China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106290
- The paper
- Wei, J., Li, Z., Xue, W., Sun, L., Fan, T., Liu, L., Su, T., & Cribb, M. (2021). The ChinaHighPM10 dataset: generation, validation, and spatiotemporal variations from 2015 to 2019 across China. Environment International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106290
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.