Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorLepioufle, Jean-Marie
dc.contributor.authorMarsteen, Leif
dc.contributor.authorJohnsrud, Mona
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-23T08:18:49Z
dc.date.available2021-03-23T08:18:49Z
dc.date.created2021-03-22T09:28:18Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationSensors. 2021, 21, 2160.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1424-8220
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734955
dc.description.abstractInstead of a flag valid/non-valid usually proposed in the quality control (QC) processes of air quality (AQ), we proposed a method that predicts the p-value of each observation as a value between 0 and 1. We based our error predictions on three approaches: the one proposed by the Working Group on Guidance for the Demonstration of Equivalence (European Commission (2010)), the one proposed by Wager (Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15, 1625–1651 (2014)) and the one proposed by Lu (Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22, 1–41 (2021)). Total Error framework enables to differentiate the different errors: input, output, structural modeling and remnant. We thus theoretically described a one-site AQ prediction based on a multi-site network using Random Forest for regression in a Total Error framework. We demonstrated the methodology with a dataset of hourly nitrogen dioxide measured by a network of monitoring stations located in Oslo, Norway and implemented the error predictions for the three approaches. The results indicate that a simple one-site AQ prediction based on a multi-site network using Random Forest for regression provides moderate metrics for fixed stations. According to the diagnostic based on predictive qq-plot and among the three approaches used in this study, the approach proposed by Lu provides better error predictions. Furthermore, ensuring a high precision of the error prediction requires efforts on getting accurate input, output and prediction model and limiting our lack of knowledge about the “true” AQ phenomena. We put effort in quantifying each type of error involved in the error prediction to assess the error prediction model and further improving it in terms of performance and precision.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectMachine learningen_US
dc.titleError Prediction of Air Quality at Monitoring Stations Using Random Forest in a Total Error Frameworken_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.en_US
dc.source.volume21en_US
dc.source.journalSensorsen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/s21062160
dc.identifier.cristin1899761
dc.relation.projectEU/27099274en_US
dc.relation.projectNILU: 117074en_US
dc.source.articlenumber2160en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal