A systematic comparison of different machine learning models for the spatial estimation of air pollution

Abstract

Air pollutants harm human health and the environment. Nowadays, deploying an air pollution monitoring network in many urban areas could provide real-time air quality assessment. However, these networks are usually sparsely distributed and the sensor calibration problems that may appear over time lead to missing and wrong measurements. There is an increasing interest in developing air quality modelling methods to minimize measurement errors, predict spatial and temporal air quality, and support more spatially-resolved health effect analysis. This research aims to evaluate the ability of three feed-forward neural network architectures for the spatial prediction of air pollutant concentrations using the measures of an air quality monitoring network. In addition to these architectures, Support Vector Machines and geostatistical methods (Inverse Distance Weighting and Ordinary Kriging) were also implemented to compare the performance of neural network models. The evaluation of the methods was performed using the historical values of seven air pollutants (Nitrogen monoxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulphur dioxide, Carbon monoxide, Ozone, and particulate matters with size less than or equal to 2.5 μ\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\upmu $$\\end{document}m and to 10 μ\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\upmu $$\\end{document}m) from an urban air quality monitoring network located at the metropolitan area of Madrid (Spain). To assess and compare the predictive ability of the models, three estimation accuracy indicators were calculated: the Root Mean Squared Error, the Mean Absolute Error, and the coefficient of determination. FFNN-based models are superior to geostatistical methods and slightly better than Support Vector Machines for fitting the spatial correlation of air pollutant measurements.Graphical abstract