Validation of PurpleAir PM2.5 Sensors in Temperate Urban Environments

ACS ES&T Air Pub Date : 2026-10-09 Epub Date: 2026-09-18 DOI:10.1021/acsestair.5c00443
Charles C. Sylvester, Nathaniel D. Hauenstein, Kabindra M. Shakya
{"title":"Validation of PurpleAir PM2.5 Sensors in Temperate Urban Environments","authors":"Charles C. Sylvester,&nbsp;Nathaniel D. Hauenstein,&nbsp;Kabindra M. Shakya","doi":"10.1021/acsestair.5c00443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Low-cost sensors (LCS), such as PurpleAir (PA), are widely\r\nused\r\nfor measuring fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) because they\r\nare inexpensive, easy to deploy, and provide publicly accessible data.\r\nHowever, PA sensors are known to overestimate PM<sub>2.5</sub>, and\r\nthus, several correction methods have been developed to improve their\r\naccuracy. In this study, we evaluated accuracy by comparing nationwide\r\nand locally derived correction methods during summer and spring seasons,\r\nexamined PA output data types, assessed the influence of relative\r\nhumidity using both PA and weather station data, and analyzed the\r\nperformance after one year of field deployment. In the moderate climate\r\nof Philadelphia, the nationwide correction of Barkjohn et al. (2021)\r\ncombined with using the mean value of two PA<sub>atm</sub> data outputs\r\n(RMSE = 1.640 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, MBE = 0.103 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, <em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.683) for both 1 h and 24 h measurements\r\nprovided the highest accuracy. Relative humidity measurements, whether\r\nobtained from a weather station or the PA sensor, had minimal effect\r\non PM<sub>2.5</sub> accuracy (difference in <em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.04). PA sensor accuracy declined after one year of use\r\n(<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.567), showing requiring extra\r\nsensor calibration in long-term deployment. This methodology enhances\r\nthe performance of PA sensors and establishes greater trust in the\r\nLCS.</p>","PeriodicalId":100014,"journal":{"name":"ACS ES&T Air","volume":"3 10","pages":"2503–2512"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS ES&T Air","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestair.5c00443","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Low-cost sensors (LCS), such as PurpleAir (PA), are widely used for measuring fine particulate matter (PM2.5) because they are inexpensive, easy to deploy, and provide publicly accessible data. However, PA sensors are known to overestimate PM2.5, and thus, several correction methods have been developed to improve their accuracy. In this study, we evaluated accuracy by comparing nationwide and locally derived correction methods during summer and spring seasons, examined PA output data types, assessed the influence of relative humidity using both PA and weather station data, and analyzed the performance after one year of field deployment. In the moderate climate of Philadelphia, the nationwide correction of Barkjohn et al. (2021) combined with using the mean value of two PAatm data outputs (RMSE = 1.640 μg/m3, MBE = 0.103 μg/m3, R2 = 0.683) for both 1 h and 24 h measurements provided the highest accuracy. Relative humidity measurements, whether obtained from a weather station or the PA sensor, had minimal effect on PM2.5 accuracy (difference in R2 = 0.04). PA sensor accuracy declined after one year of use (R2 = 0.567), showing requiring extra sensor calibration in long-term deployment. This methodology enhances the performance of PA sensors and establishes greater trust in the LCS.

PurpleAir PM2.5传感器在温带城市环境中的验证
低成本传感器(LCS),如PurpleAir (PA),被广泛用于测量细颗粒物(PM2.5),因为它们价格低廉,易于部署,并提供可公开访问的数据。然而,已知PA传感器会高估PM2.5,因此,已经开发了几种校正方法来提高其准确性。在这项研究中,我们通过比较夏季和春季的全国和地方导出的校正方法来评估精度,检查PA输出数据类型,使用PA和气象站数据评估相对湿度的影响,并分析了一年的实地部署后的表现。在费城温和气候条件下,Barkjohn et al.(2021)结合使用两个PAatm数据输出的平均值(RMSE = 1.640 μg/m3, MBE = 0.103 μg/m3, R2 = 0.683)对1 h和24 h测量的全国校正提供了最高的精度。相对湿度测量,无论是从气象站还是从PA传感器获得,对PM2.5精度的影响最小(R2差= 0.04)。PA传感器精度在使用一年后下降(R2 = 0.567),表明在长期部署中需要额外的传感器校准。这种方法提高了PA传感器的性能,并在theLCS中建立了更大的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书