English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

In recent years, the availability on the market of low-cost sensors (LCSs) and low-cost monitors (LCMs) for air quality monitoring has attracted the interest of scientists, communities, and professionals. Although the scientific community has raised concerns about their data quality, they are still considered a possible alternative to regulatory monitoring stations due to their cheapness, compactness, and lack of maintenance costs. Several studies have performed independent evaluations to investigate their performance, but a comparison of the results is difficult due to the different test conditions and metrics adopted. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tried to provide a tool for assessing the possible uses of LCSs or LCMs by publishing guidelines to assign suitable application areas for each of them on the basis of the mean normalized bias (MNB) and coefficient of variance (CV) indicators. Until today, very few studies have analyzed LCS performance by referring to the EPA guidelines. This research aimed to understand the performance and the possible application areas of two PM sensor models (PMS5003 and SPS30) on the basis of the EPA guidelines. We computed the R 2 , RMSE, MAE, MNB, CV, and other performance indicators and found that the coefficient of determination (R 2 ) ranged from 0.55 to 0.61, while the root mean squared error (RMSE) ranged from 11.02 µg/m 3 to 12.09 µg/m 3 . Moreover, the application of a correction factor to include the humidity effect produced an improvement in the performance of the PMS5003 sensor models. We also found that, based on the MNB and CV values, the EPA guidelines assigned the SPS30 sensors to the "informal information about the presence of the pollutant" application area (Tier I), while PMS5003 sensors were assigned to the "supplemental monitoring of regulatory networks" area (Tier III). Although the usefulness of the EPA guidelines is acknowledged, it appears that improvements are necessary to increase their effectiveness.

An Investigation on the Possible Application Areas of Low-Cost PM Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring