215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37201842)
1. Calibration methodology of low-cost sensors for high-quality monitoring of fine particulate matter.
Aix ML; Schmitz S; Bicout DJ
Sci Total Environ; 2023 Sep; 889():164063. PubMed ID: 37201842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A land use regression model using machine learning and locally developed low cost particulate matter sensors in Uganda.
Coker ES; Amegah AK; Mwebaze E; Ssematimba J; Bainomugisha E
Environ Res; 2021 Aug; 199():111352. PubMed ID: 34043968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network.
Considine EM; Reid CE; Ogletree MR; Dye T
Environ Pollut; 2021 Jan; 268(Pt B):115833. PubMed ID: 33120139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Field Evaluation and Calibration of Low-Cost Air Pollution Sensors for Environmental Exposure Research.
Huang J; Kwan MP; Cai J; Song W; Yu C; Kan Z; Yim SH
Sensors (Basel); 2022 Mar; 22(6):. PubMed ID: 35336552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Five Years of Accurate PM
Robinson DL; Goodman N; Vardoulakis S
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Nov; 20(23):. PubMed ID: 38063557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assessment of annual air pollution levels with PM1, PM2.5, PM10 and associated heavy metals in Algiers, Algeria.
Talbi A; Kerchich Y; Kerbachi R; Boughedaoui M
Environ Pollut; 2018 Jan; 232():252-263. PubMed ID: 28943349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The London low emission zone baseline study.
Kelly F; Armstrong B; Atkinson R; Anderson HR; Barratt B; Beevers S; Cook D; Green D; Derwent D; Mudway I; Wilkinson P;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2011 Nov; (163):3-79. PubMed ID: 22315924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Spatio-temporal variability of particulate matter in the key part of Gansu Province, Western China.
Guan Q; Cai A; Wang F; Yang L; Xu C; Liu Z
Environ Pollut; 2017 Nov; 230():189-198. PubMed ID: 28651090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Two step calibration method for ozone low-cost sensor: Field experiences with the UrbanSense DCUs.
Sá JP; Chojer H; Branco PTBS; Alvim-Ferraz MCM; Martins FG; Sousa SIV
J Environ Manage; 2023 Feb; 328():116910. PubMed ID: 36495826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment and statistical modeling of the relationship between remotely sensed aerosol optical depth and PM2.5 in the eastern United States.
Paciorek CJ; Liu Y;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2012 May; (167):5-83; discussion 85-91. PubMed ID: 22838153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Data-Driven Techniques for Low-Cost Sensor Selection and Calibration for the Use Case of Air Quality Monitoring.
Kureshi RR; Mishra BK; Thakker D; John R; Walker A; Simpson S; Thakkar N; Wante AK
Sensors (Basel); 2022 Jan; 22(3):. PubMed ID: 35161837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors: Model development for a multi-city epidemiological study.
Zusman M; Schumacher CS; Gassett AJ; Spalt EW; Austin E; Larson TV; Carvlin G; Seto E; Kaufman JD; Sheppard L
Environ Int; 2020 Jan; 134():105329. PubMed ID: 31783241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development and Evaluation of Statistical Models Based on Machine Learning Techniques for Estimating Particulate Matter (PM
Hong WY; Koh D; Yu LE
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Jun; 19(13):. PubMed ID: 35805388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development of a calibration chamber to evaluate the performance of low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Sayahi T; Kaufman D; Becnel T; Kaur K; Butterfield AE; Collingwood S; Zhang Y; Gaillardon PE; Kelly KE
Environ Pollut; 2019 Dec; 255(Pt 1):113131. PubMed ID: 31521992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance evaluation of ozone and particulate matter sensors.
DeWitt HL; Crow WL; Flowers B
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2020 Mar; 70(3):292-306. PubMed ID: 31961265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Characterization of spatial-temporal distribution and microenvironment source contribution of PM
Lee YM; Lin GY; Le TC; Hong GH; Aggarwal SG; Yu JY; Tsai CJ
Environ Res; 2024 Mar; 244():117906. PubMed ID: 38101720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. On-field test and data calibration of a low-cost sensor for fine particles exposure assessment.
Jiang Y; Zhu X; Chen C; Ge Y; Wang W; Zhao Z; Cai J; Kan H
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2021 Mar; 211():111958. PubMed ID: 33503545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Low-cost sensors for measuring airborne particulate matter: Field evaluation and calibration at a South-Eastern European site.
Kosmopoulos G; Salamalikis V; Pandis SN; Yannopoulos P; Bloutsos AA; Kazantzidis A
Sci Total Environ; 2020 Dec; 748():141396. PubMed ID: 32798875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Development and field validation of a community-engaged particulate matter air quality monitoring network in Imperial, California, USA.
Carvlin GN; Lugo H; Olmedo L; Bejarano E; Wilkie A; Meltzer D; Wong M; King G; Northcross A; Jerrett M; English PB; Hammond D; Seto E
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2017 Dec; 67(12):1342-1352. PubMed ID: 28829718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimate annual and seasonal PM
Miri M; Ghassoun Y; Dovlatabadi A; Ebrahimnejad A; Löwner MO
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2019 Jun; 174():137-145. PubMed ID: 30825736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
