Abstract
Methods of Land Use Regression (LUR) modeling and Ordinary Kriging (OK) interpolation have been widely used to offset the shortcomings of PM2.5 data observed at sparse monitoring sites. However, traditional point-based performance evaluation strategy for these methods remains stagnant, which could cause unreasonable mapping results. To address this challenge, this study employs ‘information entropy’, an area-based statistic, along with traditional point-based statistics (e.g. error rate, RMSE) to evaluate the performance of LUR model and OK interpolation in mapping PM2.5 concentrations in Houston from a multidimensional perspective. The point-based validation reveals significant differences between LUR and OK at different test sites despite the similar end-result accuracy (e.g. error rate 6.13% vs. 7.01%). Meanwhile, the area-based validation demonstrates that the PM2.5 concentrations simulated by the LUR model exhibits more detailed variations than those interpolated by the OK method (i.e. information entropy, 7.79 vs. 3.63). Results suggest that LUR modeling could better refine the spatial distribution scenario of PM2.5 concentrations compared to OK interpolation. The significance of this study primarily lies in promoting the integration of point- and area-based statistics for model performance evaluation in air pollution mapping.
Highlights
The area-based validation demonstrates that the PM2.5 concentrations simulated by the Land Use Regression (LUR) model exhibits more detailed variations than those interpolated by the Ordinary Kriging (OK) method
Comparison of Figure 2a/3a and Figure 2b/3b obviously demonstrates that the LUR simulated PM2.5 concentrations showed a higher level of details and smoother variations than OK interpolated results
This study explored the differences in spatial distributions of PM2.5 concentrations between LUR model and OK interpolation by comprehensively using point-based statistics and area-based information entropy for the first time
Summary
Performance comparison of LUR and OK in PM2.5 concentration mapping: a multidimensional perspective. Bin Zou[1,2], Yanqing Luo[1], Neng Wan[3], Zhong Zheng[1], Troy Sternberg4 & Yilan Liao[5]
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have