Repository logo
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • Research Outputs
  • Statistics
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
  1. Home
  2. Faculty of Medicine
  3. School of Public Health
  4. School of Public Health
  5. Rolling vs. seasonal PMF: real-world multi-site and synthetic dataset comparison
 
  • Details
Rolling vs. seasonal PMF: real-world multi-site and synthetic dataset comparison
File(s)
amt-15-5479-2022.pdf (1.37 MB)
Published version
Author(s)
Via, Marta
Chen, Gang
Canonaco, Francesco
Daellenbach, Kaspar R
Chazeau, Benjamin
more
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Particulate matter (PM) has become a major concern in terms of human health and climate impact. In particular, the source apportionment (SA) of organic aerosols (OA) present in submicron particles (PM1) has gained relevance as an atmospheric research field due to the diversity and complexity of its primary sources and secondary formation processes. Moreover, relatively simple but robust instruments such as the Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) are now widely available for the near-real-time online determination of the composition of the non-refractory PM1. One of the most used tools for SA purposes is the source-receptor positive matrix factorisation (PMF) model. Even though the recently developed rolling PMF technique has already been used for OA SA on ACSM datasets, no study has assessed its added value compared to the more common seasonal PMF method using a practical approach yet. In this paper, both techniques were applied to a synthetic dataset and to nine European ACSM datasets in order to spot the main output discrepancies between methods. The main advantage of the synthetic dataset approach was that the methods' outputs could be compared to the expected “true” values, i.e. the original synthetic dataset values. This approach revealed similar apportionment results amongst methods, although the rolling PMF profile's adaptability feature proved to be advantageous, as it generated output profiles that moved nearer to the truth points. Nevertheless, these results highlighted the impact of the profile anchor on the solution, as the use of a different anchor with respect to the truth led to significantly different results in both methods. In the multi-site study, while differences were generally not significant when considering year-long periods, their importance grew towards shorter time spans, as in intra-month or intra-day cycles. As far as correlation with external measurements is concerned, rolling PMF performed better than seasonal PMF globally for the ambient datasets investigated here, especially in periods between seasons. The results of this multi-site comparison coincide with the synthetic dataset in terms of rolling–seasonal similarity and rolling PMF reporting moderate improvements. Altogether, the results of this study provide solid evidence of the robustness of both methods and of the overall efficiency of the recently proposed rolling PMF approach.
Editor(s)
Tang, Mingjin
Date Issued
2022-09-27
Date Acceptance
2022-08-31
Citation
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2022, 15 (18), pp.5479-5495
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/99923
URL
https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/5479/2022/
DOI
https://www.dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-5479-2022
ISSN
1867-1381
Publisher
Copernicus Publications
Start Page
5479
End Page
5495
Journal / Book Title
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Volume
15
Issue
18
Copyright Statement
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
License URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Identifier
https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/5479/2022/
Subjects
0401 Atmospheric Sciences
Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences
Publication Status
Published
Date Publish Online
2022-09-27
About
Spiral Depositing with Spiral Publishing with Spiral Symplectic
Contact us
Open access team Report an issue
Other Services
Scholarly Communications Library Services
logo

Imperial College London

South Kensington Campus

London SW7 2AZ, UK

tel: +44 (0)20 7589 5111

Accessibility Modern slavery statement Cookie Policy

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback