z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Development of Europe-Wide Models for Particle Elemental Composition Using Supervised Linear Regression and Random Forest
Author(s) -
Jie Chen,
Kees de Hoogh,
John Gulliver,
Barbara Hoffmann,
Ole Hertel,
Matthias Ketzel,
Gudrun Weinmayr,
Mariska Bauwelinck,
Aaron van Donkelaar,
Ulla Arthur Hvidtfeldt,
Richard Atkinson,
Nicole Janssen,
Randall V. Martin,
Evangelia Samoli,
Zorana Jovanovic Andersen,
Bente Oftedal,
Massimo Stafoggia,
Tom Bellander,
Maciej Strak,
Kathrin Wolf,
Danielle Vienneau,
Bert Brunekreef,
Gerard Hoek
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
environmental science and technology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1520-5851
pISSN - 0013-936X
DOI - 10.1021/acs.est.0c06595
Subject(s) - linear regression , random forest , statistics , environmental science , regression , mean squared error , regression analysis , linear model , random effects model , predictive modelling , econometrics , mathematics , computer science , machine learning , medicine , meta analysis
We developed Europe-wide models of long-term exposure to eight elements (copper, iron, potassium, nickel, sulfur, silicon, vanadium, and zinc) in particulate matter with diameter <2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) using standardized measurements for one-year periods between October 2008 and April 2011 in 19 study areas across Europe, with supervised linear regression (SLR) and random forest (RF) algorithms. Potential predictor variables were obtained from satellites, chemical transport models, land-use, traffic, and industrial point source databases to represent different sources. Overall model performance across Europe was moderate to good for all elements with hold-out-validation R -squared ranging from 0.41 to 0.90. RF consistently outperformed SLR. Models explained within-area variation much less than the overall variation, with similar performance for RF and SLR. Maps proved a useful additional model evaluation tool. Models differed substantially between elements regarding major predictor variables, broadly reflecting known sources. Agreement between the two algorithm predictions was generally high at the overall European level and varied substantially at the national level. Applying the two models in epidemiological studies could lead to different associations with health. If both between- and within-area exposure variability are exploited, RF may be preferred. If only within-area variability is used, both methods should be interpreted equally.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom