Comparison of High Spatial Resolution PM <sub>2.5</sub> , PM <sub>10</sub> , and NO <sub>2</sub> Estimates Using a Deep Ensemble Machine Learning Framework in a Low Pollution Setting

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Recent studies report improved performance of ensemble models over machine learning (ML) models for air pollution estimation, although there is little evidence of their added value in settings with sparsely monitored data. We developed and compared three ML models, a supervised linear regression (SLR) model, and an ensemble model, for estimating annual average PM 2.5, PM 10, and NO 2 in NSW, Australia, a relatively sparsely monitored, low pollution, and large geographic region. We assembled pollutant data from government and project monitors and data on 236 predictors including land use, population, traffic, and satellite observations. We used a three-stage DEML framework: (1) base-ML models (Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, GBM) and a SLR model; (2) meta-learner (RF, XGBoost, GBM, GLMNet); and (3) ensemble. We reserved 10% of data for hold-out validation and conducted 10-fold Cross validation (CV) using the training data sets. We evaluated the models using CV- R 2 and RMSE. DEML models resulted in the best fit for all pollutants; however, improvements over base ML models were modest, indicating the latter, with lower cost of implementation, are valuable for low pollution settings with heterogeneous monitoring density. Choice of CV methods substantially impacted model performance and should be considered, along with setting constraints, when choosing modeling methods.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2026-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6c02076
Primary Topic
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of High Spatial Resolution PM 2.5 , PM 10 , and NO 2 Estimates Using a Deep Ensemble Machine Learning Framework in a Low Pollution Setting

Luke D. Knibbs, Karthik Gopi, Cassandra Yuen, Lídia Morawska et al.
Environmental Science & Technology
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
article

Comparison of High Spatial Resolution PM 2.5 , PM 10 , and NO 2 Estimates Using a Deep Ensemble Machine Learning Framework in a Low Pollution Setting

Luke D. Knibbs, Karthik Gopi, Cassandra Yuen, Lídia Morawska, Christine Cowie, Wenhua Yu, Geoffrey Morgan, Guo Y, Jane Heyworth, Nicolas Borchers-Arriagada, Bin Jalaludin, Ivan C. Hanigan, Martin Cope, Guy B. Marks
article en

Abstract

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Recent studies report improved performance of ensemble models over machine learning (ML) models for air pollution estimation, although there is little evidence of their added value in settings with sparsely monitored data. We developed and compared three ML models, a supervised linear regression (SLR) model, and an ensemble model, for estimating annual average PM 2.5, PM 10, and NO 2 in NSW, Australia, a relatively sparsely monitored, low pollution, and large geographic region. We assembled pollutant data from government and project monitors and data on 236 predictors including land use, population, traffic, and satellite observations. We used a three-stage DEML framework: (1) base-ML models (Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, GBM) and a SLR model; (2) meta-learner (RF, XGBoost, GBM, GLMNet); and (3) ensemble. We reserved 10% of data for hold-out validation and conducted 10-fold Cross validation (CV) using the training data sets. We evaluated the models using CV- R 2 and RMSE. DEML models resulted in the best fit for all pollutants; however, improvements over base ML models were modest, indicating the latter, with lower cost of implementation, are valuable for low pollution settings with heterogeneous monitoring density. Choice of CV methods substantially impacted model performance and should be considered, along with setting constraints, when choosing modeling methods.

Environmental Science & Technology
Sydney South West Area Health Service (AU), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), The University of Sydney (AU), University of Tasmania (AU), Burnet Institute (AU), Queensland University of Technology (AU), The University of Western Australia (AU), Curtin University (AU), Woolcock Institute of Medical Research (AU), Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute (AU), Commonwealth Foundation (GB), University of Surrey (GB), UNSW Sydney (AU), Menzies School of Health Research (AU), Health Sciences and Nutrition (AU), Regional Medical Research Centre (IN), Quality Research (US), Centre for Global Health Research (CA), Sydney Local Health District (AU), Centre for Rural and Remote Mental Health (AU), Research Network (United States) (US), Substance Abuse Free Environment (US), Menzies Institute for Medical Research, Monash University (AU), Macquarie University (AU)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.