Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 285

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimating Spatiotemporal Variation in Ambient Ozone Exposure during 2013–2017 Using a Data-Fusion Model

Xue, Tao, Zheng, Yixuan, Geng, Guannan, Xiao, Qingyang, Meng, Xia, Wang, Meng, Li, Xin, Wu, Nana, Zhang, Qiang, Zhu, Tong·2020·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Abstract Since 2013, clean-air actions in China have reduced ambient concentrations of PM2.5. However, recent studies suggest that ground surface O3 concentrations increased over the same period. To understand the shift in air pollutants and to comprehensively evaluate their impacts on health, a spatiotemporal model for O3 is required for exposure assessment. This study presents a data-fusion algorithm for O3 estimation that combines in situ observations, satellite remote sensing measurements, and model results from the community multiscale air quality model. Performance of the algorithm for O3 estimation was evaluated by five-fold cross-validation. The estimates are highly correlated with the in situ observations of the maximum daily 8 h averaged O3 (R2 = 0.70). The mean modeling error (measured using the root-mean-squared error) is 26 μg/m3, which accounts for 29% of the mean level. We also found that satellite O3 played a key role to improve model performance, particularly during warm months. The estimates were further used to illustrate spatiotemporal variation in O3 during 2013–2017 for the whole country. In contrast to the reduced trend of PM2.5, we found that the population-weighted O3 mean increased from 86 μg/m3 in 2013 to 95 μg/m3 in 2017, with a rate of 2.07 (95% CI: 1.65, 2.48) μg/m3 per year at the national level. This increased trend in O3 suggests that it is becoming an important contributor to the burden of diseases attributable to air pollutants in China. The developed method and the results generated from this study can be used to support future health-related studies in China.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.est.0c03098

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 285

Metadata

Authors
Xue, T., Zheng, Y., Geng, G., Xiao, Q., Meng, X., Wang, M., Li, X., Wu, N., Zhang, Q., & Zhu, T.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2020-11-11
Volume
54
Issue
23
Pages
14877-14888
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W3100935125
Cited by
285
References
44
FWCI
12.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.