Environment International 183 (2024) 108430

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environment International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envint

Review article

A comprehensive review of the development of land use regression

approaches for modeling spatiotemporal variations of ambient air
pollution: A perspective from 2011 to 2023
Xuying Ma a, b, c, *, Bin Zou d, *, Jun Deng b, e, Jay Gao f, Ian Longley g, Shun Xiao h, Bin Guo a,
Yarui Wu a, Tingting Xu i, Xin Xu j, Xiaosha Yang k, Xiaoqi Wang a, Zelei Tan a, Yifan Wang a,
Lidia Morawska c, *, Jennifer Salmond f
a
College of Geomatics, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
b
College of Safety Science and Engineering, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
c
International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland 4000, Australia
d
School of Geosciences and Info-Physics, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410083, China
e
Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Prevention and Control of Coal Fire, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
f
School of Environment, Faculty of Science, University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
g
National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
h
School of Geography and Tourism, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China
i
School of Software Engineering, Chongqing University of Post and Telecommunications, Chongqing 400065, China
j
Xi’an Institute for Innovative Earth Environment Research, Xi’an 710061, China
k
Shandong Nova Fitness Co., Ltd., Baoji, Shaanxi 722404, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Land use regression (LUR) models are widely used in epidemiological and environmental studies to estimate
Air pollution humans’ exposure to air pollution within urban areas. However, the early models, developed using linear re­
Land use regression gressions and data from fixed monitoring stations and passive sampling, were primarily designed to model
Multi-source observations
traditional and criteria air pollutants and had limitations in capturing high-resolution spatiotemporal variations
Spatiotemporal modeling
of air pollution. Over the past decade, there has been a notable development of multi-source observations from
Linear regression
Advanced statistical methods low-cost monitors, mobile monitoring, and satellites, in conjunction with the integration of advanced statistical
methods and spatially and temporally dynamic predictors, which have facilitated significant expansion and
advancement of LUR approaches. This paper reviews and synthesizes the recent advances in LUR approaches
from the perspectives of the changes in air quality data acquisition, novel predictor variables, advances in model-
developing approaches, improvements in validation methods, model transferability, and modeling software as
reported in 155 LUR studies published between 2011 and 2023. We demonstrate that these developments have
enabled LUR models to be developed for larger study areas and encompass a wider range of criteria and un­
regulated air pollutants. LUR models in the conventional spatial structure have been complemented by more
complex spatiotemporal structures. Compared with linear models, advanced statistical methods yield better
predictions when handling data with complex relationships and interactions. Finally, this study explores new
developments, identifies potential pathways for further breakthroughs in LUR methodologies, and proposes
future research directions. In this context, LUR approaches have the potential to make a significant contribution
to future efforts to model the patterns of long- and short-term exposure of urban populations to air pollution.

1. Introduction (Hao et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2007; Cesaroni et al., 2013; Liu and He,
2016; Huang et al., 2018; Lim et al., 2018; Renzi et al., 2018; Ma et al.,
Numerous epidemiological studies have conclusively established the 2020c; Owusu and Sarkodie, 2020; Zou et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2021a; Li
link between exposure to air pollution and detrimental health outcomes et al., 2021; Bai et al., 2022a). Quantifying exposure to air pollution is of

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: xma295@aucklanduni.ac.nz (X. Ma), 210010@csu.edu.cn (B. Zou), l.morawska@qut.edu.au (L. Morawska).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108430
Received 3 September 2023; Received in revised form 26 November 2023; Accepted 4 January 2024
Available online 7 January 2024
0160-4120/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
X. Ma et al.
great importance in the development of effective mitigation policies (Ma
et al., 2020b). Approaches for air pollution modeling include deter­
ministic modeling (dispersion and chemical transport modeling), remote
sensing inversion, interpolation methods, and land use regression (LUR)
models (Jerrett et al., 2005; Oyjinda and Pochai, 2017; Ma et al., 2019;
Ma et al., 2022a; Bai et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023). LUR approaches
(Fig. S1 illustrates a general LUR modeling framework) were first
introduced by Briggs et al. in 1997 and have since gained widespread
popularity for modeling ambient air quality in many epidemiological
studies such as the SAVIAH (Small Area Variations In Air Quality and
Health) study and ESCAPE (European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution
Effects) project in Europe, the MESA Air (Multi-Ethnic Study of
Atherosclerosis and Air Pollution) and ACT-AP (Adult Changes in
Thought – Air Pollution) studies in the US (Briggs et al., 1997; Beelen
et al., 2007; Hoek et al., 2008; Sampson et al., 2011; de Hoogh et al.,
2013; Wang et al., 2013a; van Nunen et al., 2017; Bi et al., 2022). In
comparison with alternative approaches, LUR modeling stands out as a
cost-effective and approachable method (Allen et al., 2011; Song et al.,
2019).
Since its advent, LUR modeling has undergone rapid development,
with the concept being extended over time. From a narrow perspective,
the original format of an LUR model was developed using multiple linear
regressions with temporally averaged observations from routine stations
or passive sampling and traditional land-use-related predictor variables,
and its main purpose was to capture long-term spatial variations of air
pollution. Therefore, there were limitations in capturing local-scale
spatial patterns of air pollution with high-temporal resolution.
Furthermore, although moderate to good performance was achieved in
modeling traditional and criteria air pollutants (e.g., fine particulate
matter [PM2.5], nitrogen dioxide [NO2], black carbon [BC]), modeling of
some unregulated air pollutants (e.g., non-tailpipe particles, secondary
organic aerosols) was less effective (Liu et al., 2022). Over the last
decade, with the escalating demands of epidemiological research, LUR
approaches have been further developed and expanded to model the
spatiotemporal variations of a wider range of air pollutants. Therefore,
in a broader and more recent context, an LUR model can be described as
an empirical or statistical model developed within the original or
extended modeling framework. These models use multi-source obser­
vations (data obtained from either fixed monitoring stations [FMSs],
passive diffusion tubes, low-cost monitors, mobile monitoring, or sat­
ellites or a combination of them) of air pollution and are developed by
advanced statistical techniques incorporating a wide range of spatially
and temporally variable predictors. They can estimate spatial and tem­
poral variations of various air pollutants, making them suitable for both
long-term and short-term exposure studies. In the context of our review,
the term “LUR” refers to this comprehensive definition.
The development of LUR approaches has been reviewed by many
scholars. The three older reviews (Jerrett et al., 2005; Ryan and
LeMasters, 2007; Hoek et al., 2008) only covered 36 early LUR studies.
However, hundreds of new studies have emerged since then, reporting
advances in various aspects of LUR approaches, including changes in air
quality data acquisition, availability of novel predictor variables, model
development, and model validation techniques, among others. The three
recent studies by Amini et al. (2017), Ma et al., (2020a), and He et al.
(2018) only reported on the application of LUR for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and ozone (O3) worldwide and the criteria air pol­
lutants (PM2.5, PM10, and NO2) solely in China, while their wider ap­
plications for other unregulated air pollutants were not discussed.
Additionally, the review by Rybarczyk and Zalakeviciute (2018)
emphasized the introduction of model construction algorithms,
neglecting the development of other key aspects within LUR approaches.
Therefore, to the best of our knowledge, there is currently no compre­
hensive review available that effectively summarizes and synthesizes
the recent advances in LUR modeling of ambient air pollution in the
above-mentioned context.
The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review and
2
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
synthesis of the recent advances in LUR approaches for modeling the
spatiotemporal variations of ambient air pollution based on publications
from 2011 to 2023. After giving an overview of the identified studies,
the review was structured according to the modeling framework of LUR.
Some application tools and software that can automate LUR approaches
were also recommended. Lastly, new developments and future research
directions in LUR studies were also discussed.
2. Methods
2.1. Literature search
Extensive literature searches in Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and
Web of Science were carried out to identify a wide range of studies that
use LUR approaches. Search strings in various combinations used in the
search were: “air pollution modeling”, “air pollution mapping”, “land
use regression”, “exposure modeling”, “spatial variations”, “spatiotem­
poral variations”, “machine learning”, and “statistical modeling”. The
final search was implemented on 20 May 2023. Fully and online pub­
lished papers only in English between 2011 and 2023 were included in
this review. This was supplemented by papers listed in the references of
the traced papers and relevant papers that were acquired through con­
tact with the authors of the traced papers. Thirteen papers suggested by
the reviewers were also included.
2.2. Eligibility criteria
Articles included in our review were required to meet at least one of
the following criteria: (1) the authors explicitly identified the developed
models in their studies as LUR models; (2) the studies developed sta­
tistical or hybrid models for estimating spatial or spatiotemporal vari­
ations of air pollution following an LUR framework in a general view,
even if the authors did not explicitly label the models as LUR models; (3)
the focus of the studies was on exploring factors influencing the per­
formance of LUR modeling; and (4) the studies included the use of tools
and software designed to automate the implementation of LUR
modeling. In cases where multiple studies reported a similar approach,
we selected and included only the earliest one in our review. Fig. 1
shows a roadmap illustrating the strategy used to perform the literature
search. It is noted that despite the systematic search, we do not claim this
review to be exhaustive and cover all the relevant papers.
3. Overview of the identified studies
3.1. Identified studies
We identified 155 relevant research articles. Among them, 137 were
case-specific studies for LUR modeling of different air pollutants
(Table S1 in the Supplementary Information [SI]); 5 studies investigated
the effects of different factors (e.g., spatial extent, sampling design) on
the performance of LUR modeling; 7 studies (refer to Section 8) explored
the transferability of developed models, and 6 studies (refer to Section 9)
introduced LUR modeling tools and software.
3.2. Study locations
Fig. 2 shows the study locations of the reviewed studies. Most were
carried out in Western Europe, the USA, and China at the city or regional
scale. Larkin et al. (2017) even developed a global scale model using
data from 5,220 sites in 58 countries across the world. The trend towards
large study area models on national, continental, and even global scales
allows the implementation of multi-center epidemiological studies. An
increasing number of studies (Rose et al., 2011; Knibbs et al., 2014;
Miskell et al., 2015; Weissert et al., 2018; Yeganeh et al., 2018; Cowie
et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2019; Weissert et al., 2019; Rahman et al., 2020)
in Oceania explored the performance of LUR approaches in a Southern
X. Ma et al. Environment International 183 (2024) 108430

Fig. 1. A roadmap illustrating the process of the literature search.

Fig. 2. Study locations in the reviewed articles (areas highlighted in color indicate that they were modeled either at the national or regional scale).

Hemisphere setting. More recently, several pilot studies (Abera et al.,
2020; Coker et al., 2021; Tularam et al., 2021) were also implemented in
Africa. It has to be noted that no studies were reported from South
America. Therefore, future studies could further examine the applica­
tions of LUR modeling in South American countries.
3.3. Air pollutants modeled
Initially, LUR approaches were primarily designed to model air
pollutants associated with traffic emissions, specifically focusing on NO2
and NOX (Stedman et al., 1997; Ryan and LeMasters, 2007; Hoek et al.,
2008). From 2001 to 2010, LUR modeling expanded successfully to
encompass various other criteria air pollutants, including particulate

3
X. Ma et al.
matter (PM), O3, carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2).
Subsequently, the advances in LUR approaches led to the modeling of a
wider range of air pollutants, including BC, VOCs, and particle number
concentration (PNC). More recently, many unregulated air pollutants
including PM components, non-tailpipe particles, and organic aerosols
have been modeled by novel LUR approaches in some pilot studies (Li
et al., 2017; Meng et al., 2018; Robinson et al., 2019; Tripathy et al.,
2019; Liu et al., 2022; Yin et al., 2022). This rapid development has
expanded the scope of LUR beyond traditional traffic-related air pol­
lutants (e.g., NO2) and allowed for the effective modeling of diverse air
pollutants. Fig. 3 illustrates the frequency distribution of air pollutants
modeled in the reviewed articles. Among the various pollutants, fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) and NO2 are the most extensively studied.
They are followed by particles with a diameter of 10 µm or less (PM10),
PM compositions, BC, O3, PNC, and SO2. The figure highlights the
prevalence of research focused on these specific air pollutants in the
reviewed literature.
3.4. Model performance
Fig. 4 provides an overview of the performance of LUR models for
various air pollutants as reported in the reviewed articles. The range of
R2 values observed in these studies spans from 0.07 to 0.97. It is
important to note that the performance of LUR models can differ
significantly for different air pollutants. In general, LUR models for
criteria air pollutants tend to perform better than LURs for unregulated
air pollutants. As illustrated in Fig. 4, the model R2 for NO2 ranges from
0.16 to 0.96, whereas the model R2 for PM1 ranges from 0.45 to 0.80.
Considering the temporal aspect, long-term LUR models (e.g., annual
models) tend to perform better than short-term LURs (e.g., hourly
models). Additionally, LUR models based on fixed-site monitoring data
generally perform better than those developed using mobile monitoring
data. Another factor influencing the model performance is the number of
monitoring sites used in model development. LUR models developed
using a small number of sites often perform better than those developed
using a large number of sites. This discrepancy can be attributed to the
potential inflation of the model R2 when using small samples.
3.5. The evolution of LUR
In the last decade, LUR approaches have been significantly expanded
due to the emergence of multi-source observations and advances in
statistical techniques. This has led to a substantial evolution in LUR
Fig. 3. The frequency of different air pollutants shown in the reviewed articles from 2011 to 2023.
4
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
models. First, there is a trend toward developing LUR models for larger
study areas to facilitate the implementation of multi-center epidemio­
logical studies. These models are often for regulated air pollutants, based
on data from routine monitoring followed by researcher monitoring.
More recently, researchers have become increasingly interested in
applying this to air pollutants that are difficult to measure over large
areas, such as ultrafine particles (UFP). Second, the recent approaches
have advanced to encompass a wider range of air pollutants, including
some unregulated pollutants such as non-tailpipe particles and organic
aerosols. This expansion allows for a more comprehensive understand­
ing of air pollution and its potential health impacts. Third, LUR models
in the conventional spatial structure have been complemented by more
complex spatiotemporal structures. This enhancement allows for the
incorporation of temporal dynamics, enabling a better understanding of
how air pollutant concentrations vary over time in addition to their
spatial distribution. The evolution in these three aspects has further
addressed the demands of epidemiological and environmental studies.
4. Changes in air quality data acquisition
This section provides a summary of how the latest advances in air
quality data acquisition techniques have contributed to the evolution of
LUR approaches. Additionally, we delve into the understanding of how
the design of monitoring networks impacts the modeling results,
consolidating insights in this area.
4.1. Low-cost monitors and sensors
Recent advances in technologies have enabled expensive and com­
plex stationary equipment for air pollution monitoring to be supple­
mented with more affordable, portable monitors or sensors (Snyder
et al., 2013; Masiol et al., 2018; Masiol et al., 2019; Dong et al., 2021).
Low-cost monitors (LCMs; note that the ongoing debate revolves around
what constitutes an LCM in terms of the threshold price) enable air
pollution to be measured within an affordable budget, especially wire­
less distributed sensor networks (WDSNs) that can even provide
extremely high spatiotemporal patterns of air pollution in real-time
(Miskell et al., 2017; Caubel et al., 2019; Cao et al., 2020; Weissert
et al., 2020; Shafran-Nathan et al., 2021).
Large-scale practical LCM networks have been deployed in major
cities in several leading countries, such as the PurpleAir network in the
US and micro-station networks in China (Han et al., 2020; Zhang et al.,
2020; PurpleAir, 2021; Guo et al., 2022). There has been marked growth
X. Ma et al.
Fig. 4. Performance (model R2) of LUR models for different air pollutants in the reviewed articles.
in using the PurpleAir data because they are publicly available and
calibrated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ensuring
reliability (Bi et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2022). Generally, two strategies can
be employed in modeling when incorporating these observations: (1)
using them as inputs on the dependent side of the model, and (2) using
them as a predictor variable on the independent side of the model. Both
strategies can enhance performance compared with the baseline model.
Furthermore, strategy (1) tends to yield superior results, particularly
when data are appropriately calibrated (Bi et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2022).
The use of LCM data offers numerous advantages. First, its deploy­
ment in diverse settings, including urban, suburban, and natural areas,
surpasses the limited coverage of sparse regular stations primarily
concentrated in urban regions (Abera et al., 2020; Bi et al., 2022).
Second, they can provide predictions at a finer spatial resolution,
capturing localized pollution hotspots and variations within neighbor­
hoods or specific areas (Weissert et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2019b; Munir
et al., 2020). This level of detail is particularly valuable for assessing air
quality impacts on a smaller scale or near pollution sources. Third, the
integration of LCM data (e.g., as a secondary predictor variable) can
facilitate the modeling of unregulated air pollutants that require
extensive and costly field measurements. Liu et al. (2022) used Pur­
pleAir PM2.5 data as an auxiliary variable in modeling the spatial vari­
ations of brake and tire-wear metals, as well as oxidative stress potential,
in Southern California.
However, low-cost monitors and sensors also have limitations. On
one hand, while the sensors are cheap, the operational costs for running
a dense network are still high – almost as high as for compliance
monitoring. From this viewpoint, the traditional passive samplers are
possibly the best low-cost monitoring solution for air pollutants such as
NO2 to improve modeling for weekly resolutions or longer. On the other
hand, LCMs are not generally used for regulatory purposes and the most
contentious point is reliability, particularly when weather conditions
change during measurements (Clifford et al., 2011; Yeganeh et al., 2018;
Rahman et al., 2020; Coker et al., 2021). The tolerance for measurement
uncertainty may become an issue when incorporating a large number of
LCM sites in LUR modeling. Further research is necessary to
5
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
quantitatively assess the trade-offs between adding LCMs and the quality
of the measurements (Bi et al., 2022). Therefore, careful attention
should be paid to the quality of the sensors, maintenance of the moni­
toring network, calibration, and correction of the raw measurements.
Recent studies have explored some solutions to improve the reliability of
low-cost monitoring (Boubrima et al., 2015; Smith et al., 2017; Miskell
et al., 2018a; Williams, 2019; Mao et al., 2019; Considine et al., 2021;
Han et al., 2021). Lastly, it’s important to note that, for air pollutants
requiring non-routine monitoring approaches, such as UFP and particle
composition, there are currently no affordable, low-cost sensors
available.
4.2. Mobile monitoring
Air quality data collected by mobile monitoring have been widely
used to develop LUR models in numerous recent studies (Hankey and
Marshall, 2015; Hatzopoulou et al., 2017; Lim et al., 2019; Liu et al.,
2019a; Van den Hove et al., 2020; Xu et al., 2021; Xu et al., 2022b).
Mobile monitoring shows great promise for understanding fine-scale
spatial pollutant patterns and identifying emission sources and urban
air pollution hotspots efficiently (Villa et al., 2016; Miller et al., 2020;
Wu et al., 2020).
Generally, mobile measurement campaigns can be carried out by five
kinds of mobile monitoring platforms: (1) pedestrian-based platforms
(Van den Bossche et al., 2016; Van den Bossche et al., 2018); (2) bicycle-
based platforms (Hankey and Marshall, 2015; Hankey et al., 2019; Zhou
and Lin, 2019); (3) customized vehicle-based platforms (Shi et al., 2016;
Liu et al., 2019a); (4) the mobile lab (e.g., Google Street View [GSV]
cars) (Apte et al., 2017; Messier et al., 2018; Qi and Hankey, 2021;
Kerckhoffs et al., 2022); and (5) mobile fleets (e.g., hundreds of moni­
toring taxis) (Wu et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2021).
Two types of data collection protocols can be applied: (1) short-term
stationary monitoring (Li et al., 2018a; Blanco et al., 2021); and (2) non-
stationary or on-road mobile monitoring (Kerckhoffs et al., 2016; Minet
et al., 2018). This difference can potentially result in minor or sub­
stantial differences in the developed models. Kerckhoffs et al. (2016)
X. Ma et al.
found that LUR models based on the two methods generated highly
correlated UFP and BC concentration surfaces; in contrast, in a similar
study, Minet et al. (2018) found that the predictors captured in each
model were different, and the exposure surfaces were also dissimilar.
Nevertheless, both studies indicated a common observation that LUR
models derived from on-road mobile monitoring tended to consistently
overestimate pollutant concentrations. This can be attributed to the fact
that the measurements were only representative of concentrations along
the road (Shi et al., 2016).
For on-road mobile monitoring, special attention should be given to
the processing of the data because the data quality is highly influenced
by the surrounding environment during instantaneous sampling. To
strengthen data representativeness and minimize uncertainties, it is
essential to increase the number of revisits during the monitoring
campaign and implement appropriate spatial aggregation techniques for
the raw measurements (Blanco et al., 2021). These measures can
contribute to more robust and reliable models. The performance of
models based on these data is also sensitive to various factors, including
the locations visited, the number of locations, the frequency of visits at
each location, and the chosen aggregation method (Hankey and
Marshall, 2015; Hatzopoulou et al., 2017).
The strengths of mobile monitoring are straightforward. First, it is a
cost-effective way to cover large study areas and capture the spatial
variations of air pollution at the street scale. Mobile monitoring con­
ducted by two GSV cars enables air pollution patterns to be revealed at a
spatial precision of 4–5 orders of magnitude greater than that of tradi­
tional FMSs (Apte et al., 2017; Messier et al., 2018). Second, its mobility
offers an opportunity to explore understudied areas (e.g., rural com­
munities). Third, comparable data-only mapping of air pollution can be
achieved solely through dense mobile monitoring (sufficient repeat
visits on roads) without the need for additional modeling efforts (Apte
et al., 2017; Messier et al., 2018). Fourth, it also facilitates the mea­
surement of unregulated air pollutants across a wide geographical area.
With the help of mobile monitoring, Li et al., (2018a) and Robinson et al.
(2019) for the first time developed LUR models for organic carbon and
its thermally resolved fractions and PM1 and sub-components in Pitts­
burgh, PA, and Oakland, CA, respectively.
However, mobile monitoring also faces shortcomings and challenges.
On one hand, a key challenge is the need for extensive work on sampling
and the careful handling of data aggregation. This is crucial to minimize
uncertainties caused by temporal variations, short-term events, and
other influential factors that may arise during mobile monitoring
(Hatzopoulou et al., 2017). On the other hand, measurements or model
outcomes obtained from mobile monitoring may not directly reflect
outdoor human air pollution exposure. This is because the data often
capture on-road air pollutants, which can lead to biased results if they
are directly applied to background areas without proper calibration.
Furthermore, most existing mobile monitoring studies only focus on
data collection during the daytime, with limited reporting on nighttime
results, leading to a gap in the understanding of on-road air pollution
throughout the day. However, this limitation can be overcome by the
recent transfer-learning method proposed by Yuan et al. (2022) and the
deployment of 24-hour continuous mobile monitoring networks in
China (Zhao et al., 2021).
4.3. Satellite observations
In addition to in situ monitoring, the use of satellite observations has
gained increasing prominence in LUR modeling (Lee et al., 2016; Meng
et al., 2016; de Hoogh et al., 2018; Lee, 2019; Stafoggia et al., 2019;
Sorek-Hamer et al., 2020). A significant benefit is that satellite data offer
extensive and synoptic coverage, capturing both spatial and temporal
variations across vast geographical areas (Vienneau et al., 2013; Van
Donkelaar et al., 2015). The integration of satellite observations has
significantly enhanced the spatiotemporal capabilities of LUR models,
benefiting from both the resolved spatial information from the LUR
6
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
models and the spatiotemporal information from the satellite models
(Kloog et al., 2011).
A primary satellite observation commonly used in modeling ground-
level PM concentrations is aerosol optical depth (AOD) (Sorek-Hamer
et al., 2020). The ongoing evolution of AOD products, exemplified by the
transition from Deep Blue to Multiangle Implementation of Atmospheric
Correction (MAIAC), with spatial resolutions being enhanced from 10
km to 1 km, has played a pivotal role in advancing the development of
PM2.5 and PM10 LUR models (Kloog et al., 2014; Just et al., 2015; Lee
et al., 2016; Meng et al., 2016; de Hoogh et al., 2018; Lee, 2019; Sta­
foggia et al., 2019). This enables researchers to capture more localized
variations in air pollutant concentrations and develop more accurate
LUR models. Furthermore, the use of AOD products from multiple sat­
ellites (e.g., MODIS, SeaWiFS, and MISR) has proven valuable in
developing a global PM2.5 model. This approach can be further
improved by incorporating GEOS-Chem simulation and geographically
weighted regression (Van Donkelaar et al., 2015; Van Donkelaar et al.,
2016). Satellite observations offer insight into long-term changes and
spatial characterization in ambient PM2.5 concentrations on a global
scale.
The use of other satellite-retrieved products in LUR studies is also
abundant. The tropospheric vertical column density (VCD) retrieved
from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) has emerged as a valuable
data source for modeling ground-level NO2 concentrations across
various spatial scales (Novotny et al., 2011; Anand and Monks, 2017; Qi
et al., 2022). The incorporation of OMI data in a multistage framework
with mixed-effect and random forest models has been used to develop a
NO2 model with fine-scale spatial (100×100 m) and temporal (daily)
resolution (de Hoogh et al., 2019). Similar to OMI but with enhanced
capabilities, the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI)
products have been used in the modeling of ground-level NO2 (Kim
et al., 2021), NOX (Goldberg et al., 2019), and O3 (Wang et al., 2022). Its
superior spatial resolution enables more detailed and precise observa­
tions, allowing for a finer-scale characterization of pollutant distribu­
tions. More recently, observations from the new generation of
geostationary satellites were also incorporated into modeling. She et al.
(2020) and Vu et al. (2022) used AOD products retrieved by the Geo­
stationary Ocean Color Imager (GOCI) and Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellite-16 (GOES-16) to estimate hourly PM2.5 in Cal­
ifornia, USA, and the Yangtze River Delta, China, respectively. These
advanced geostationary satellites provide near-real-time and continuous
measurements of key atmospheric parameters, enabling researchers to
capture and analyze air pollution with higher temporal resolution (e.g.,
sub-hour).
However, satellite observations also face limitations and challenges.
One of the primary challenges is the coarse spatial resolution (Bai et al.,
2022b). While newer satellite instruments provide improved spatial
resolution compared with their predecessors, they may still lack the fine-
scale detail required for accurate modeling at the local level. Another
challenge is the potential for uncertainties and biases in the data because
satellites measure air pollution indirectly. Various factors, such as at­
mospheric conditions, instrument calibration, and data processing al­
gorithms, can introduce errors in satellite observations. These
uncertainties need to be carefully addressed and accounted for in the
modeling process to avoid inaccuracies in the results. Furthermore, they
are limited to certain atmospheric pollutants (e.g., NO2, O3) and may not
capture the full spectrum of air pollutants of interest in modeling. Lastly,
satellite data availability and coverage can vary across regions and pe­
riods. This can pose challenges when conducting comparative studies or
when attempting to capture temporal variations in air pollution over
extended periods.
4.4. New insights into the impact of monitoring network design
This section delves into the impact of various factors, such as the
type, number, density, and distribution of sites on the fixed-site network,
X. Ma et al.
as well as the number of visits, road coverage, and sampling temporality
on the mobile monitoring network.
4.4.1. Fixed sites
As NO2 is an indicator of traffic-related air pollution and is easy to
measure, LUR studies primarily employ it as a key parameter for analysis
of the design of monitoring networks. Models including stations in
highly populated areas tend to yield better NO2 predictions across res­
idential locations. However, models including more roadside stations
better capture the higher end of residential NO2 concentrations, albeit
with larger errors in representing the full range of concentrations (Wu
et al., 2017). Regarding the influence of the number of sites, models
using more stations tend to yield better predictions and enhanced model
stability, especially when the number of sites is below 30 (Wu et al.,
2017; Dong et al., 2021). However, the model performance slightly
decreases with a continuous increase in the number of training sites
when measured through internal validation. Conversely, the trend is the
opposite if measured by external validation. This is because models with
small samples tend to exhibit an inflated R2 compared with external
validation results (Basagaña et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2012). It is rec­
ommended that a minimum of 30 sites should be used for developing an
appropriate model, with an ideal number exceeding 60 for specific
studies and at least 80 sites for complex urban settings. Linear NO2
models can be robust to variations in spatial sampling density and
extent. While the model’s performance may not be influenced by the
spatial extent, the spatial variability of NO2 surfaces can be affected
(Maddix and Adams, 2020). Therefore, careful consideration should be
given to the selection of sampling density and extent to capture the
desired spatial variation in air pollution surfaces.
4.4.2. Mobile monitoring network
For on-road measurement campaigns, studies have revealed the
significance of road coverage (number of road segments) and repeat
visits in determining the model’s performance. Hatzopoulou et al.
(2017) demonstrated that a stable long-term model for PNC and NO2
could be achieved with approximately 150 to 200 road segments and
10–12 visits per segment. Further supported by Saha et al. (2019), which
found that at least 10–15 days with 1 h of sampling per day were
necessary to develop PNC models with good precision and low error.
Among these factors, the number of repeat visits is a particularly
influential factor. Messier et al. (2018) revealed that data-only NO and
BC mapping yielded poor results with only a few (1–2) repeat visits.
However, when models were developed using only 30 % of the roads in
the modeling domain but 4–8 repeat visits per road segment, the results
became comparable with those obtained with full data. Similarly, the
inclusion of road segments with at least three visits resulted in R2 values
of 0.60 for PNC and 0.51 for BC, while including road segments with at
least 16 visits raised these values to 0.74 for PNC and 0.55 for BC
(Hatzopoulou et al., 2017). Increasing the number of repeat visits can
significantly enhance the model’s performance.
Two recent studies by Blanco et al. (2021), Blanco et al. (2022) have
provided valuable insights into the design of short-term stationary
monitoring campaigns. Consistent with previous findings, their results
further revealed that the number of visits holds greater significance than
the number of sites. It was observed that as the number of sites and
repeat site visits increased, the model performances improved,
approaching those of the all-data campaign. However, the improvement
exhibited diminishing returns at higher stop counts. Interestingly, it
revealed that increasing the number of sites versus visits did not
significantly impact the model performances for any of the pollutants, as
long as the total stop count was met. Furthermore, they also confirmed
that collecting temporally balanced samples can lead to additional
model enhancements. This was evident in the sampling designs that
incorporated more extensive sampling periods, covering various sea­
sons, days of the week, and hours. The findings underscore the impor­
tance of a temporally-balanced sampling design for mobile monitoring
7
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
aiming to accurately assess long-term exposure in epidemiologic
cohorts.
5. Novel predictor variables
In recent years, there has been a remarkable expansion of the pre­
dictor variable pool, owing to the rapid growth in data availability. The
wide range of novel predictor variables considered in models is intro­
duced below.
5.1. Traffic volumes
Traffic volumes, or traffic intensity, play a crucial role in modeling
traffic-related air pollution (TRAP). NO2 and NOX models including
traffic volume variables generally exhibit a 10 % higher R2 compared
with models without considering them (Hoek et al., 2011; Beelen et al.,
2013; Hassanpour Matikolaei et al., 2019). However, site-specific vari­
ations such as pollutant choice and the proportion of local emissions
from traffic sources can also influence the effectiveness of the incorpo­
ration of these variables (Dons et al., 2013). For long-term modeling,
incorporating long-term traffic volume variables can be advantageous,
although they can be substituted with the length of specific road types
when such data are unavailable (Brauer et al., 2003; Madsen et al., 2007;
Henderson et al., 2007).
5.2. Emission sources
Industrial and traffic emissions are major contributors to air pollu­
tion in most cities and including them helps to enhance the model per­
formance (Chen et al., 2012; Guttikunda et al., 2014; Huang et al.,
2017). They have been identified as significant predictors in models
conducted at various scales for different air pollutants. Chen et al.
(2012) incorporated point industrial source predictors in the modeling
for Tianjin, China, at the city scale. They proved to be significant in the
models for SO2, NO2, and PM10, improving the model performance.
Similarly, at the country scale, the density of point source NOX emissions
was a significant variable in the NO2 model developed for Australia
(Knibbs et al., 2014). It is anticipated that the incorporation of emission
data on a finer temporal scale, such as hourly data, will help develop
models with fine temporal resolution.
5.3. Meteorological parameters
Air pollution dispersion is influenced by meteorological factors, and
incorporating them can lead to improvements in model performance
(Guttikunda and Gurjar, 2012; Meng et al., 2016; Shen et al., 2021).
Meteorological variables such as boundary layer height, cloud cover,
precipitation, and solar exposure are important to models developed for
large areas (Liu et al., 2015; Yeganeh et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2019a; Ma
et al., 2021a). Temporally dynamic meteorological variables (e.g.,
hourly parameters) are the key factors in improving the temporal reso­
lution of the models (Su et al., 2008a; Miskell et al., 2018b; Son et al.,
2018). Furthermore, Yin et al. (2022) have further confirmed that
meteorological variables of high resolution are an essential aspect of
spatiotemporal modeling.
The development of reanalysis products has significantly enhanced
the spatiotemporal resolution and accessibility of meteorology data
(Azizian and Ramezani, 2019; Marcos et al., 2019). More recently, the
release of the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) project and Dark
Sky API (replaced by Apple’s WeatherKit API) have made real-time
higher-resolution meteorology data available (Vu et al., 2022; Yin
et al., 2022). Additionally, some LCMs can also provide real-time on-site
meteorological parameters.
X. Ma et al.
5.4. Socioeconomic factors
Air pollution is influenced by human activities, making socioeco­
nomic factors a contributor to accurate modeling. The commonly used
variables include population growth, gross domestic product (GDP), and
median family income (Vizcaino and Lavalle, 2018; Ma et al., 2019; Liu
et al., 2019a). These data can be obtained from local councils, census
bureaus, and model estimation (Kummu et al., 2018). While socioeco­
nomic factors have been widely used in many LUR studies, special
attention should be paid to whether the developed models are designed
for epidemiological studies and investigation of environmental justice.
This is because these variables wield significant influence as con­
founding factors in such studies, often overlapping with socioeconomic
status data. Consequently, it becomes necessary to exclude socioeco­
nomic variables during the development of models in scenarios of this
nature.
5.5. Urban morphology
Incorporating urban morphology variables can contribute to a 2 % –
13 % improvement in R2 of the models (Su et al., 2008b; Eeftens et al.,
2013). More recently, urban morphology variables have been exten­
sively applied in the micro-scale and street-level modeling based on
crowdsourced LCMs and mobile monitoring (Shi et al., 2016; Miskell
et al., 2018b; Shi et al., 2018; Zhou and Lin, 2019; Liu et al., 2021a).
Additionally, incorporating wind direction factors when generating
these variables can further enhance the model performance. Ghassoun
et al. (2019) introduced pseudo dynamic parameters (PDPs) that
describe the interaction between wind and urban morphology, resulting
in improved performance of a UFP model. However, incorporating
urban morphology data can present challenges because of the limited
data accessibility. Furthermore, generating certain variables, such as sky
view factor (SVF), involves complex 3D spatial calculations (Miao et al.,
2020; Li et al., 2020).
5.6. Remote-sensing-derived variables
Satellite-derived variables promoted by the advancement of remote
sensing have proven valuable, particularly in modeling criteria air pol­
lutants (Mao et al., 2012; Larkin et al., 2017; Xu et al., 2019a). The
commonly used variables in modeling NO2 and PM are NO2 VCD from
the OMI/TROPOMI, and AOD from the MODIS and other stationary
instruments (He et al., 2018). Novotny et al. (2011) developed a
national-scale NO2 LUR model for the contiguous United States and
observed a significant improvement when including OMI tropospheric
NO2 column data. In addition to VCD and AOD data, satellite-derived
land cover, enhanced vegetation index (EVI), greenness, brightness,
wetness, and nighttime light variables are also introduced in LUR
modeling (Vienneau et al., 2013; Huang et al., 2019; Ji et al., 2019).
However, one limitation of these variables is their relatively low spatial
resolution, typically ranging from 1 to 10 km. Therefore, they are useful
information for background instead of local (more suitable for larger-
scale modeling) and generally are used with additional more refined
data.
5.7. Imagery-derived variables
Fine-scale spatial modeling encounters a challenge when traditional
variables fail to align with the high spatial resolution of monitoring data.
To address this issue, a promising solution is to use imagery to extract
hyperlocal variables. Ganji et al. (2020) extracted built environment
features from Google aerial and street view images, providing insights
into the micro-characteristics and functional aspects of urban locations.
Expanding on this concept, Qi and Hankey (2021) used deep learning
scene parsing techniques to extract variables from GSV imagery,
capturing street-level characteristics of both the built and natural
8
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
environment. These imagery-derived variables have proven effective in
developing models for PNC, BC, and NO2, at both city and national
scales. The inclusion of imagery in LUR modeling allows for the gener­
ation of predictor variables that align with the fine spatial scale of data
collected through dense LCM networks and mobile monitoring. More­
over, this approach ensures the generation of variables consistently
across administrative and political boundaries, facilitating comparisons
and analysis on a broader scale.
5.8. Variables derived from other simulation outputs
There has been a growing trend to incorporate outputs from other
simulations as variables in model development, creating what is known
as hybrid models. Michanowicz et al. (2016a), Michanowicz et al.
(2016b) integrated AERMOD-based PM2.5 and Caline3-based NO2 pre­
dictions to construct hybrid PM2.5 LUR/AERMOD and NO2 LUR/Caline3
models. They observed an improvement in predictive power ranging
from 2 % to 10 %. More recent studies have further extended this
approach by incorporating additional variables, including air quality
model (AQM) estimates, GEOS-Chem simulated PM2.5 constituents,
chemical transport model (CTM) estimates for PM2.5, NO2, and O3,
SIMAIR estimates for NOX, CALPUFF/ADMS-Urban simulated disper­
sion of emissions, as well as AERMOD simulated PM2.5, BC, and metal
components (de Hoogh et al., 2016; Di et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2016;
Korek et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2017; Meng et al., 2018; Tripathy et al.,
2019; Tularam et al., 2021). The inclusion of these variables in the
hybrid models not only has enhanced the spatial predictive power of the
models but also has significantly improved their temporal resolution.
5.9. New variable generation techniques
While circular buffers have been predominantly used, recent
research has indicated that variables extracted using irregular buffers
may be a more suitable choice. Li et al. (2015) introduced the
semicircular-buffer-based (SCBB) variable generation method, which
takes wind direction into account. The SCBB LUR models demonstrated
an improvement of 7 % to 16 % in R2. Naughton et al. (2018) took a
further step and extracted variables within wind-dependent sectors or
“wedges.” This approach was applied to develop a national-scale LUR
model for the Republic of Ireland, which accounted for 78 % of the
spatial variability in NO2 concentrations.
The selection of buffer sizes also influences the spatial resolution and
performance of the model. Ideally, the strategy for selecting buffer sizes
should consider the dispersion patterns of air pollutants and the scale of
the modeling exercise. Liu et al., 2021b developed an optimal buffer
selection strategy based on dichotomy and the model explained an
additional 5 % of the variability in PM2.5 concentrations.
In summary, the use of an extensive array of spatially and temporally
variable predictors has greatly enhanced the predictive capabilities of
current models. Variables such as urban morphology and imagery-
derived predictors contribute to a better understanding of spatial vari­
ations, while meteorological variables significantly improve the model’s
ability to explain temporal variations. These advances facilitate a more
comprehensive modeling of air quality, ultimately leading to a more
accurate representation of air pollution from a spatiotemporal
perspective.
6. Advances in model-developing approaches
6.1. Modeling algorithms
A wide range of modeling algorithms can be employed to develop the
mathematical relationship between air pollution and predictor vari­
ables. These algorithms are typically classified into five categories,
which are outlined below (Table 1).
X. Ma et al.
Table 1
LUR studies using different modeling algorithms.
Categories (sub- Algorithms Studies
categories)
Linear MLR Chen et al. (2012); Kheirbek et al.
(2012); Beelen et al. (2013); Miskell
et al. (2015); Huang et al. (2017); Ma
et al. (2019); Guo et al. (2020)
Regularization LASSO Larkin et al. (2017); Son et al.
(2018); Chen et al. (2019);
Kerckhoffs et al. (2019); Coker et al.
(2021)
Elastic Net Suleiman et al. (2016); Mandal et al.
(2019); Mandal et al. (2020); Ren
et al. (2020); Zhou et al. (2020)
RIDGE Polat and Gunay (2015); Kerckhoffs
et al. (2019); Mahanta et al. (2019);
Coker et al. (2021)
GWR Hu et al. (2013); Robinson et al.
(2013); Zhai et al. (2018); Guo et al.,
(2021b); Xuan et al. (2021)
LME Rose et al. (2011); Meng et al.
(2016); Son et al. (2018); Mirzaei
et al. (2020); Kerckhoffs et al. (2022)
GLM Sun et al. (2013); Garcia et al.
(2016); Chen et al. (2019); Gujral
and Sinha (2021); Zhang et al.,
(2021a)
Advanced interpolation UK Mercer et al. (2011); Sampson et al.
(2013); Xu et al., (2019a); Xu et al.,
(2019c); Nori-Sarma et al. (2020)
Nonlinear GAM Clifford et al. (2011); Zou et al.
(2016); Li et al. (2017); Chen et al.
(2019); Gerling et al. (2020); Zhang
et al., (2021a)
MARS Nieto and Antón (2014); Shahraiyni
et al. (2015); Roy et al. (2016); Kisi
et al. (2017); Chen et al. (2019)
BME Akita et al. (2012); Akita et al.
(2014); Adam-Poupart et al. (2014);
Reyes and Serre (2014); Chen et al.
(2018); Cowie et al. (2019); DeLang
et al. (2021)
Machine learning (can be ANN Singh et al. (2012); Zou et al.,
applied in both spatial (2015b); Alimissis et al. (2018);
and spatiotemporal) Wang et al. (2019); Park et al.
(2020); Chen et al. (2021)
SVM Yeganeh et al. (2012); Awad et al.
(2017); Yang et al. (2018); Su et al.
(2020); Mogollón-Sotelo et al.
(2021); Zhang et al., (2021b)
RF Araki et al. (2018); Brokamp et al.
(2018); Zhan et al. (2018); Yuchi
et al. (2019); Shao et al. (2020); Ma
et al., (2021a); Ma et al., (2021b)
KNN Marjovi et al. (2015); Bozdağ et al.
(2020); Cihan et al. (2021); Tella
et al. (2021); Tella and Balogun
(2021)
XGBoost Hu et al. (2017); Wang et al.,
(2020a); AlThuwaynee et al. (2021);
Liu et al. (2021c); Zhao et al. (2021)
Ensemble Di et al. (2019); Lim et al. (2019);
Van Roode et al. (2019); Adams et al.
(2020); Liu (2021b); Huang et al.
(2022)
More complex ST-LUR Sampson et al. (2011); Keller et al.
spatiotemporal (2015); Wang et al. (2015); Wang
methods et al. (2016); Wang et al. (2023)
Two-step local Leung et al. (2019)
regression
9
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
6.1.1. Linear models
Multiple linear regression (MLR) is the most used algorithm (Ker­
ckhoffs et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2019b). Among various methods in
developing an MLR model, the standardized supervised forward step­
wise regression method introduced by the ESCAPE (European Study of
Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects) project is particularly popular in
relevant studies (Eeftens et al., 2012; van Nunen et al., 2017). However,
MLR models can encounter challenges when dealing with a large num­
ber of variables that are highly correlated or collinear. They may pro­
duce unstable or unreliable estimates of the coefficients, which can lead
to difficulties in interpreting the model and making accurate
predictions.
In this regard, regularization methods are introduced to address the
potential correlation among predictor variables by applying different
penalties (Kerckhoffs et al., 2019). They provide valuable tools for
managing correlated predictors, enhancing model performance, and
facilitating model interpretation (Chen et al., 2019; Mahanta et al.,
2019). Additionally, MLR faces another challenge in capturing local
spatial variations of air pollution. To address this issue and account for
spatial heterogeneity, geographically weighted regression (GWR) is
introduced, enabling the coefficients to vary spatially to generate local
regression results, providing a better depiction of spatial patterns (Hu
et al., 2013). Linear mixed-effects (LME) regression, another extension
of MLR, allows for the incorporation of both fixed and random effects
and is particularly suitable for handling non-independent data arising
from a hierarchical structure (Rose et al., 2011). Unlike other linear
models, a generalized linear model (GLM) allows the expected value of
the outcome to be modeled as a non-linear transformation of the stan­
dard linear function of regression parameters and predictor variables
(Nelder and Wedderburn, 1972). Compared with MLR, GLM allows
response variables to have arbitrary distributions instead of simply
normal distributions (Zhang et al., 2021a).
In summary, linear models offer several advantages, such as
simplicity, efficiency, stability, and interpretability. However, to
leverage these benefits, it is also crucial to carefully consider the as­
sumptions, assess the linearity of relationships, address multicollinearity
issues, and handle outliers and influential points appropriately.
6.1.2. Advanced interpolation
Universal kriging (UK), also known as regression-kriging, is an
advanced interpolation technique that offers significant improvements
over traditional interpolation methods, and is especially useful in large
study areas (Mercer et al., 2011; Sampson et al., 2013). By combining
the strengths of MLR and kriging, UK leverages both the global trend
captured by MLR and the local spatial autocorrelation captured by
kriging, leading to more accurate and reliable interpolation results.
Studies have demonstrated that UK models outperform corresponding
MLR models, making them a state-of-the-art technique for spatial
interpolation (Mercer et al., 2011; Ma et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2019a).
6.1.3. Nonlinear models
Nonlinear models have been widely used to develop LUR models in
recent years. A generalized additive model (GAM) is a specialized form
of a GLM where linear terms are replaced by smooth functions of pre­
dictor variables (Zou et al., 2016). This allows GAM to offer greater
flexibility in fitting the data and capturing complex relationships,
potentially resulting in a substantially different model compared with
the corresponding GLM (Clifford et al., 2011). Multivariate adaptive
regression spline (MARS) extends linear models to automatically model
nonlinearities and interactions among predictor variables (Friedman,
1991; Kisi et al., 2017). MARS does not rely on assuming a specific
functional relationship between the response and predictors, making it
particularly useful for estimating general functions in high-dimensional
settings with limited data (Shahraiyni et al., 2015; Roy et al., 2016).
Bayesian maximum entropy (BME) is an estimation approach that al­
lows the use of multivariate data from diverse sources with varying
X. Ma et al.
quality, spatial resolution, and measurement techniques (Christakos and
Li, 1998; Chen et al., 2018). This can be particularly valuable in
modeling for capturing within-city variability and is applicable to large
geographic domains, as other methods may have limited capabilities in
managing spatial non-stationarity over large areas and addressing the
uncertainty associated with missing monitoring data (Akita et al., 2012).
The BME modeling framework offers the capability to merge monitoring
data with outputs from existing LUR and CTM models (Akita et al.,
2014). It has demonstrated superior performance when compared with
more traditional approaches because it jointly considers both the global-
scale variability in concentration derived from CTM outputs and the
intraurban-scale variability from LUR model outputs.
In summary, the use of nonlinear models in LUR modeling brings
several benefits, including the flexibility to capture complex relation­
ships, the ability to handle non-normal data distributions, and improved
predictive performance.
6.1.4. Machine learning
Machine learning (ML) algorithms have gained widespread use in
various LUR studies. The commonly used ML algorithms are the artificial
neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest
(RF), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost),
and ensemble learning (Liu, 2021; Tella et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2020a;
Cabaneros et al., 2019; Di et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2018; Araki et al.,
2018). ML approaches can be applied to develop both fine-scale spatial
and spatiotemporal models.
Overall, ML algorithms offer powerful tools for modeling complex
relationships and interactions in data, and their application in various
scenarios has demonstrated their effectiveness in generating accurate
predictions and uncovering patterns that may not be captured by
traditional linear approaches. However, to fully leverage these benefits,
it is essential to address certain considerations, including managing the
increased computational requirements, addressing potential overfitting
issues, and handling model interpretation appropriately.
6.1.5. More complex spatiotemporal methods
In addition, there are several methods specifically designed for
developing spatiotemporal models. The spatiotemporal LUR (ST-LUR)
approach, was initially developed for the Multi-Ethnic Study of
Atherosclerosis and Air Pollution (MESA Air) project (Sampson et al.,
2011). It provides a hierarchical modeling framework specifically
designed to address air pollution datasets consisting of a small number
of sites that offer information on temporal variations, along with a larger
number of sites with short-term measurements, providing broader
spatial coverage. This approach, as well as its extensions incorporating
CTM and satellite data, have proven to be successful in various studies
(Wang et al., 2015; Keller et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2016; Xu et al.,
2022a; Wang et al., 2023). One benefit is its ability to capture spatially
varying temporal trends and nonstationary spatial correlation struc­
tures. This is achieved by incorporating complex spatiotemporal in­
teractions that account for the variation in seasonal patterns across
different locations. Additionally, it is also designed to handle missing
data effectively, even in scenarios where data may be incomplete or
irregularly sampled.
Another noteworthy method is the two-step local regression
approach employed by Leung et al. (2019) for modeling spatiotemporal
patterns of PM2.5 concentrations based on an integration of fixed-site
and mobile monitoring data. It combines the strengths of GWR in the
spatial dimension and local polynomial smoothing techniques in the
temporal dimension (Yan and Mei, 2014). The benefit is that it not only
considers both spatial and temporal information of the data but also
corrects the so-called boundary effect by using the local linear smoother.
Furthermore, it also allows different bandwidths to be chosen at
different time points and spatial locations, which allows flexible
exploration of the underlying local spatiotemporal patterns of the data.
10
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
6.2. Comparison among different algorithms
In recent years, several model-developing algorithms have been
compared by Clifford et al. (2011), Mercer et al. (2011), Adam-Poupart
et al. (2014), Brokamp et al. (2017), Kisi et al. (2017), Cowie et al.
(2019), Lim et al. (2019), and Bozdağ et al. (2020) to assess their pre­
dictive performance. These studies offer valuable insights into the
benefits of using various modeling algorithms across diverse contexts.
However, these comparative studies also have certain limitations,
making it challenging to draw consistent conclusions about the best-
performing algorithm as they compared different pairs of algorithms
across each study.
More recently, three insightful studies have significantly contributed
to our understanding of this issue. Chen et al. (2019) conducted a
comprehensive comparison of 16 algorithms to predict annual mean
concentrations of air pollutants using a large dataset comprising 543
PM2.5 and 2399 NO2 monitoring sites across Europe. Kerckhoffs et al.
(2019) evaluated the performance of 20 algorithms for predicting long-
term UFP concentrations based on 8200 segments of mobile monitoring
data and 368 sites of short-term stationary measurements collected in
multiple cities. Ren et al. (2020) compared 13 algorithms for fine-
resolution estimation of ambient O3 concentrations based on data
from 1313 monitoring sites across the contiguous United States. The
comparisons in these studies were more rigorous and comprehensive.
Several general conclusions and consistent patterns regarding the
predictive performance of these algorithms can be drawn from the
available studies:
(1) For predicting long-term PM2.5, NO2, and UFP across large areas,
most algorithms exhibit similar performance, with only a few ML
approaches such as RF and bagging slightly outperforming
others.
(2) In the context of predicting O3 concentrations, ML approaches
generally produce better predictions than linear models.
(3) The ensemble approach may not necessarily improve the per­
formance of the best individual model if most models perform
similarly across algorithms. The effectiveness of ensemble
learning depends on the diversity and variability among the
alternative models.
(4) “Simple” linear models can perform comparably well when
compared with ML algorithms, particularly when the relation­
ships between air pollutant concentrations and predictor vari­
ables are not complex.
(5) ML algorithms demonstrate their strength in handling data with
complex relationships and interactions, especially in modeling
spatiotemporal variations of air pollution.
6.3. Advancements in model structures
6.3.1. Spatial models with more refined temporal resolutions
The early annual LUR models were not sufficient to capture seasonal
and diurnal variations of air pollution that are needed in epidemiolog­
ical studies (Dons et al., 2013; Lu et al., 2020). Therefore, to expand the
temporal scope of LUR models, several approaches have been intro­
duced to integrate temporal variabilities into their model structures,
enhancing the time resolutions of these models from annual to more
refined temporal scales.
One simple method involves adjusting the temporal trend observed
at an FMS and applying it to LUR predictions. Gan et al. (2011) used
month-year adjustment factors derived from regulatory monitoring data
to estimate monthly mean concentrations based on an annual mean
source model. Another approach introduced a dummy variable to indi­
cate different periods in modeling and has been used to develop models
with various temporal resolutions (e.g., monthly [MacIntyre et al., 2011;
Mao et al., 2012] and weekday/weekend [Noth et al., 2011]). However,
these approaches assume that temporal trends are consistent across all
X. Ma et al.
sites and are not suitable for modeling air pollutants with significant
spatiotemporal variability (e.g., BC). To address this issue, one approach
was introduced by recalibrating the existing LUR model with new
measurements at the same sites to account for different periods (Wang
et al., 2013b). Subsequently, an improved approach was employed that
allowed for variables and coefficients to change over time, resulting in
the development of several separate models. Masiol et al. (2018)
developed 24 hourly PM LUR models that included 16–26 significant
predictor variables with the model R2 ranging from 0.63 to 0.77. Don
et al. (2013) further compared the performance of hourly BC models
developed by different methodologies (e.g., employing dummy vari­
ables, with dynamic dependent variables and/or with dynamic and
static independent variables). The results indicate that developing new
independent hourly models, with static or dynamic covariates, is
considered the optimal solution.
Advancements in developing spatial models with more refined
temporal resolutions have substantial implications and advantages. The
inclusion of temporal variability in LUR modeling allows for a deeper
understanding of the health effects of air pollution when combined with
human space-time activity. Employing air pollution predictions from
more refined or multiple temporally aggregated models in long-term
exposure studies can account for the considerable effect of temporal
variability in air pollution, resulting in a more accurate exposure
assessment (Lu et al., 2020).
6.3.2. Spatiotemporal models
To improve LUR models’ capability to capture fine-scale variations of
air pollution in both space and time, researchers in recent years have
made great efforts to develop spatiotemporal LUR models (Wang et al.,
2016; Chen et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2019; Van den Bossche et al., 2020).
These spatiotemporal models predict air pollutant concentrations at a
specific time-point (e.g., on a specific day or hour) across a spatial
domain, while traditional spatial models with more refined temporal
resolutions still predict the average concentration but in a more refined
time resolution than the annual average. The development of epidemi­
ological studies and monitoring techniques has promoted the advance­
ment of spatiotemporal modeling. On one hand, cohort studies
investigating the association between air pollution exposure and chronic
health effects necessitate accurate exposure predictions across various
locations over extended periods. On the other hand, the availability of
abundant yet irregular spatiotemporal monitoring data, collected
through a combination of diverse monitoring techniques, also requires
the developed models to effectively handle both spatial and temporal
dimensions of the data (Sampson et al., 2011).
More recently, the increase in spatiotemporal modeling was driven
by the emergence of fine-scale satellite data (e.g., MAIAC AOD), the use
of advanced statistical methods (e.g., ST-LUR, ML), and the incorpora­
tion of temporally dynamic predictors (e.g., high-resolution meteo­
rology data). These developments have enabled the extension of LUR
approaches to create more robust and flexible spatiotemporal models
capable of handling high-resolution spatial and temporal information.
Advanced statistical methods employ more flexible structures to effec­
tively capture the complex correlations and interactions between high
spatiotemporal resolution air quality measurements and various types of
static and dynamic predictor variables. Additionally, satellite observa­
tions offer extensive spatial coverage, fine-scale resolution, and rich
temporal dynamics, making them indispensable in enhancing the
spatiotemporal modeling capabilities of LUR models. Moreover,
temporally dynamic predictors can effectively capture and describe the
intricate temporal variations in air pollution, accounting for factors that
change over time and have a direct impact on pollutant concentrations.
For example, Rahman et al. (2020) developed spatiotemporal (hourly)
PNC models in Brisbane, Australia, based on the RF algorithm, and the
best models explained 73 %, 64 %, and 88 % of the spatiotemporal
variability for three particle size ranges of <30 nm, <414 nm, and
<3000 nm, respectively. In a more recent study by Wang et al. (2023),
11
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
spatiotemporal models for criteria air pollutants were developed, based
on an advanced geostatistical framework (ST-LUR) incorporating sat­
ellite data and estimated daily Air Quality Index (AQI) levels at 100-
meter resolution in Shanghai, China.
LURs in the spatial form have been enriched by the introduction of
spatiotemporal models, a development that carries significant implica­
tions and benefits (Zhang et al., 2018). Spatial models estimate con­
centrations at a specific averaged time point, mostly assuming that the
relationship between response and variables remains constant over
time. In contrast, spatiotemporal models incorporate temporal infor­
mation, allowing for the relationship to vary both across space and over
time. This transition facilitates more accurate predictions of air pollu­
tion patterns, improves the assessment of exposure across space and over
time, and enables the identification of temporal trends and hotspots.
Ultimately, the application of spatiotemporal models can also enhance
our ability to address the challenges and complexities associated with air
pollution research, policy-making, and public health interventions.
7. Improvements in model validation
The commonly used validation methods can be divided into two
categories: cross-validation (CV) and hold-out validation (HV). CVs can
be further grouped into two types: (1) k-fold CV (KCV), and (2) leave-
one-out CV (LOOCV) (Rose et al., 2011; Olvera et al., 2012; Weissert
et al., 2018; Rahman et al., 2020). Although these two CV methods are
widely used, they have been criticized for tending to overestimate per­
formance as the CV-R2 of the model may be inflated when models are
based on a small number of training sites and when many variables are
available (Wang et al., 2013a; Dong et al., 2021). To partly mitigate the
overestimation, they have been extended to some new forms. KCV is
implemented multiple times in a bootstrap fashion to reduce un­
certainties (Larkin et al., 2017; Simon et al., 2018). The LOOCV method
has been extended to more forms such as leave-one-group-out CV
(Weissert et al., 2018; Weissert et al., 2019), leave-one-day-out CV (Di
et al., 2016), leave-one-area-out CV (Wang et al., 2014; van Nunen et al.,
2017; Xu et al., 2019a), and leave-one-month-out temporal CV (Ren
et al., 2020). A key concern in adopting CV is whether in the process a
new model is built for each fold. This can lead to significant differences
in model structures and statistical results. However, most authors did
not clarify this matter in our reviewed studies. The HV method is suit­
able for a large dataset as it can reduce uncertainties raised by the
random split of the data. Moreover, it can also be used iteratively in a
bootstrap fashion (Hankey and Marshall, 2015).
Early studies primarily focused on validating the spatial variability of
LUR models. However, as models in the spatial structure have been
complemented by spatiotemporal structures, recent studies have adop­
ted validations in both spatial and temporal dimensions to assess the
spatiotemporal variability of the developed model (Wang et al., 2015;
Ren et al., 2020). Furthermore, they have demonstrated the importance
of employing a combination of validation methods alongside different
data-splitting strategies instead of relying on a single method. Ren et al.
(2020) used six data splitting and validation strategies including 75 %
criterion HV, 10-repeated HV, 10-fold CV, 10-fold spatial validation,
leave-month-out temporal validation, and peak validation to fully
compare the predictive skills of models developed using different algo­
rithms in their study.
In summary, by incorporating both spatial and temporal dimensions
into the validation process and adopting a multi-method, multi-data-
splitting approach, researchers can gain a more comprehensive under­
standing of the spatiotemporal variability and predictive capabilities of
their LUR models.
8. Model transferability
Transferability refers to the degree to which an LUR model devel­
oped in one place can be applied to other places (Patton et al., 2015;
X. Ma et al. Environment International 183 (2024) 108430

Zalzal et al., 2019). It has predominantly been studied in the context of
transferring models between cities. Direct transfer leads to a significant
decrease in predictive performance, whereas indirect transfer results in
a minor-to-moderate drop in performance (Zalzal et al., 2019).
Furthermore, although the transferred models exhibited reduced per­
formance compared with the source models, they still outperformed
simple binary or continuous road proximity metrics (Allen et al., 2011).
In recent studies, the transferability was tested in a wider scope.
Large-scale regional models have modest-to-good performance when
they are directly transferred to other regions; however, the regional
source model is unable to capture local-scale variations of air pollution
(Wang et al., 2014; Marcon et al., 2015). Regarding the temporal
transferability, it was observed that transferring long-term NO2 models
over time with the recalibration of coefficients yielded satisfactory
performance (R2 = 0.67–0.80) as annual NO2 concentrations were
highly correlated and stable over time (Marcon et al., 2015).
More recently, there has been a focus on the within-city trans­
ferability of neighborhood-specific or area-specific LUR models. This is
particularly relevant for developing countries’ megacities, where the
lack of routine monitoring makes it challenging to develop citywide
models. Directly transferred neighborhood-specific models can effec­
tively estimate relative ranking in exposures within a city but struggle to
predict absolute values accurately (Patton et al., 2015; Yang et al.,
2020). Consistent with findings from inter-city transferability studies,
indirectly transferred models exhibit performance levels close to those
of the source models and significantly outperform directly transferred
models.
Previous studies have consistently demonstrated that direct transfer
often yields poor performance and successful transfer requires indirect
recalibration of the source model to suit the local setting (Poplawski
et al., 2009; Marcon et al., 2015; Miskell et al., 2015; Patton et al., 2015;
Weissert et al., 2018; Ma et al., 2019; Zalzal et al., 2019; Yang et al.,
2020). However, the indirect transfer also faces two limitations. First, it
involves additional cost and time for data collection. Furthermore, a
new local-specific model can be developed based on the recalibration
monitoring campaign as well as the recalibrated transferred model.
Many studies (Miskell et al., 2015; Patton et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2020)
have demonstrated that this new local model is superior to the trans­
ferred model. Consequently, the desirability of indirect transfer of the
source model diminishes. Second, after recalibration, the sign of the
coefficient for at least one predictor often changes, rendering the
interpretation of the transferred model challenging. The improvement in
fitting comes at the expense of physical interpretability rather than true
transferability.
In conclusion, our analysis indicates that LUR models exhibit limited
transferability to areas beyond their original development locations.
This limitation stems from the empirical nature of these models.
9. Application tools and modeling software
While LUR approaches have been widely used in studies, documen­
tation is scarce regarding the automation of the modeling process and
the availability of accessible application tools and software. Currently,
the options for such resources are limited, with only one R package
(SpatioTemporal), two ArcGIS toolboxes (LUR Tools and XLUR), and
four software applications (RLUR, PyLUR, OpenLUR, and eLUR) pub­
licly available. Table 2 provides a summary of the general information
about these tools and software, while their merits and suitability are
briefly discussed in Text S2 in the SI.
The limited availability of automated tools and software for LUR
modeling signifies the need for further development and accessibility in
this field. Efforts should be directed toward creating user-friendly ap­
plications and resources that facilitate the automation of the modeling
process, thus streamlining and expediting the application of LUR
modeling in research and practice.
10. New developments and future research directions
This section highlights various potential avenues for the further
development and improvement of LUR methodology. By focusing on
these areas of improvement, the LUR methodology can evolve and
progress, leading to more robust and versatile models for assessing and
understanding air pollution in diverse settings.
10.1. Modeling unregulated air pollutants
Recent studies (Strak et al., 2017; Verma et al., 2015) have high­
lighted the adverse health effects of unregulated air pollutants on
humans, leading to increased demand for modeling these pollutants.
However, this poses a current challenge as previous research indicates
that LUR approaches perform less effectively for unregulated pollutants
compared with criteria air pollutants within studies. Robinson et al.

Table 2
General information on accessible application tools and software for LUR modeling.
Tool names Authors Languages Interface Running Functions Built-in modules Modeling algorithms
environment

SpatioTemporal Lindström et al. R N/A R Fitting and evaluative of a Smooth temporal Hierarchical
(2013) class of Gaussian functions, parameter spatiotemporal
spatiotemporal processes estimation, predictions, modeling framework
cross-validation
LUR tools Akita (2014) N/A Wizard-style ArcGIS 10.0+ Predictor variable Cell count tools, extract N/A
interface generation tools, feature size tools,
general tools
RLUR Morley and Gulliver R Graphical RStudio Modeling, prediction, and Variable creation, model MLR
(2018) user visualization builder, prediction
interface
PyLUR Ma et al., (2020d) Python N/A Python 2.x Modeling and prediction Variable generation, MLR
regression modeling,
model validation,
prediction & mapping
OpenLUR Lautenschlager et al. Python N/A Python 3.x Modeling and prediction Feature extraction, AutoML
(2020) modeling, regression
runner
XLUR Mölter and Lindley Python Wizard-style ArcGIS Pro Modeling, prediction, and BuildLUR, ApplyLUR MLR
(2021); Mölter interface v.2.2+ visualization
(2020)
eLUR Li (2022) Python Graphical Python 3.x Modeling, prediction, and File uploading, model MLR
user visualization builder, mapping, model
interface validation

12
X. Ma et al.
(2019) revealed that LUR models for secondary PM components
exhibited poorer performance compared with the models for primary
PM components. This is because secondary species, which form over
long atmospheric time scales and are subject to regional transport,
cannot be accurately described using traditional predictor variables.
To address this issue, future studies can consider the following so­
lutions. One major challenge in modeling unregulated air pollutants is
the limited availability of regular monitoring data. This can be overcome
by incorporating complementary data sources, such as LCMs and mobile
monitoring (Liu et al., 2022; Robinson et al., 2019). In addition to
traditional land-use variables, future models can incorporate novel
predictors (e.g., incorporate CTM when generating predictor variables,
and introduce CTM-derived variables) that capture regional transport
patterns, atmospheric chemistry, and meteorology. They can provide a
more comprehensive understanding of the spatiotemporal variations of
unregulated air pollutants. Furthermore, it is valuable to explore the
integration of other modeling approaches, such as air dispersion models
and CTMs, in the modeling process. Unregulated air pollutants often
result from intricate chemical processes that are not fully captured by
data-driven models alone. By incorporating these deterministic models,
researchers can gain insights into the underlying processes and improve
the accuracy of predictions for unregulated air pollutants.
10.2. Integration of stationary and mobile monitoring data
Stationary monitoring provides adequate temporal coverage but
limited spatial coverage, whereas mobile monitoring offers satisfactory
spatial coverage but limited temporal coverage. To address these limi­
tations, the integration of stationary and mobile data can provide
spatiotemporally dense observations, enabling the development of
models with enhanced spatial and temporal resolution. Several pilot
studies have explored this field. Simon et al. (2018) developed hybrid
models by combining measurements from mobile monitoring and a fixed
reference station to estimate PNC in Chelsea and Boston, MA, USA. The
results showed that the hybrid model noticeably outperformed the
mobile-only model. Leung et al. (2019) integrated measurements from
stations and mobile monitoring to generate spatiotemporally dense
datasets based on the assumption that spatial variations of PM2.5 con­
centrations are insignificant within a distance of 10 s of driving time,
and then a model for estimating PM2.5 concentrations was developed
using the integrated datasets and two-step local regression. Zhao et al.
(2021) developed a model based on combined stationary and mobile
monitoring to estimate PM2.5 concentrations in Beijing, China, at 1 km
by 1 km and 1 h resolutions. The core of the proposed methodology is to
transform the surrounding mobile monitoring data to approximate the
readings of PM2.5 concentrations in the grid without a stationary site.
This model significantly outperformed the baseline model using only
stationary monitoring data.
While these studies have made strides in integrating stationary and
mobile data for modeling purposes, this field remains largely unex­
plored, presenting opportunities for future research. Two key questions
that could be explored to further advance this approach are: (1) What
are the spatiotemporal correlations between stationary observations and
surrounding mobile monitoring data? Understanding these correlations
can help establish the relationships between different monitoring plat­
forms and inform data integration strategies, and (2) How can we
appropriately weigh measurements from different platforms in the
modeling process, considering that data quality from stationary sites and
mobile sensors may differ? Developing robust methodologies for
incorporating and weighting data from distinct platforms is crucial for
reliable modeling results.
10.3. Introducing more novel predictor variables
By applying the latest techniques, we can enhance the acquisition of
predictor data, thereby expanding the range of variables considered in
13
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
LUR modeling. For instance, recent technologies such as panoramic
images, 3D point clouds, and the use of GSV cars have revolutionized the
field, making it more feasible to gather such data on a larger scale and at
a lower cost (Wu et al., 2021; Qi and Hankey, 2021; Bonczak and
Kontokosta, 2019). In the future, we can leverage advanced techniques
such as drone-based data collection, aerial LiDAR, and remote sensing to
obtain vast amounts of data. These data can encompass a wide array of
novel predictor variables that capture spatial and temporal character­
istics relevant to modeling, providing a better understanding of the
complex relationships between air pollution and its influencing factors
and enhancing predictive accuracy.
10.4. Optimizing predictor variable selection strategies
Currently, most studies focus on data fitting and aim to maximize the
R2 of the model, particularly when using ML algorithms. However,
relying solely on data fitting for predictor variable selection strategies
can result in limited robustness, interpretability, and transferability of
the fitted model.
To address this limitation, future studies should strive to optimize
predictor variable selection strategies by considering additional factors.
Integrating air pollution dispersion mechanisms into the variable se­
lection process can lead to a significant breakthrough. Qi and Hankey
(2021) proposed an advanced variable selection strategy that combined
three methods: theory-driven variable selection, data-driven variable
selection, and integrated variable selection. Building upon this idea,
future studies should address the following questions: (1) What types of
variables are essential among the pool of potential predictor variables?
and (2) What criteria should be employed in the predictor variable se­
lection strategies? Additionally, dimensionality reduction techniques
such as principal component analysis (PCA) can be used to reduce the
number of variables in the model while retaining the most important
information (Xu et al., 2022b; Coker et al., 2021; Olvera et al., 2012).
Finally, the developed novel strategies should aim not only to improve
model fitting but also to enhance the robustness, interpretability, and
transferability of the resulting models.
10.5. Incorporating remote sensing and downscaling techniques
The integration of remote sensing observations and the downscaling
technique holds great potential for advancing the modeling of spatio­
temporal variations in air pollution across wider areas with finer reso­
lutions. A notable example is the work of Huang et al. (2021), who
proposed a novel modeling framework incorporating remote sensing
data and downscaling techniques to estimate spatiotemporal variations
of ground-level PM2.5 concentrations at both national (1 km) and local
(100 m) scales.
To further enhance this modeling framework and generate more
robust estimations with even higher spatial and temporal resolution,
future studies could consider incorporating additional elements. One
potential avenue is the integration of satellite data with LCM or mobile
monitoring observations. This combination would leverage the
strengths of both approaches, enabling the capture of more detailed and
comprehensive information on air pollution modeling.
10.6. Deep integration of air pollution dispersion mechanisms in modeling
Previous hybrid models demonstrated slightly improved perfor­
mance in terms of fitting accuracy compared to standalone LUR models
(Wang and Xu, 2021; Wu et al., 2018). However, the level of integration
remained relatively low, primarily relying on the use of outputs from
deterministic models as predictor variables in LUR modeling. Despite
the progress made, these models still exhibited a limited capacity to
explain the mechanisms behind the formation, atmospheric transport,
and dispersion of air pollutants. Thus, achieving a deep integration be­
tween LUR and deterministic models while considering air pollution
X. Ma et al.
dynamics in the modeling remains a significant challenge.
To address this challenge, future studies should focus on developing
novel methods for generating variables and variable selection strategies
by incorporating deterministic models. Moreover, it is crucial to
consider air pollution dispersion mechanisms within the statistical
modeling procedures to establish advanced hybrid LUR models capable
of providing deeper insights into the formation, transportation, and
distribution of air pollutants.
10.7. Keeping a balance between efficient computation and high-quality
model performance
The growing trend of using integrated modeling approaches incor­
porating diverse data combinations and multiple algorithms has
prompted a crucial question of how to strike a balance between
achieving more efficient computation and maintaining high-quality
model performance. To address this challenge, several potential strate­
gies are outlined below.
(1) Prioritization of predictor variables: identify the most important
predictors by optimizing the predictor variable selection to
simplify the model structure.
(2) Algorithm selection and optimization: consider the computa­
tional complexity and scalability of different algorithms, opting
for those that offer a good trade-off between efficiency and per­
formance. Fine-tune hyperparameters and optimize algorithmic
settings to achieve the best compromise between computational
speed and model quality.
(3) Use of parallel computing and distributed systems: leverage
parallel computing techniques and distributed systems to
distribute the computational workload across multiple processors
or machines.
(4) Incremental learning and model updating: instead of retraining
the entire model from scratch, consider updating the model
incrementally, taking advantage of the existing knowledge, and
only incorporating new data as needed to minimize computa­
tional costs.
10.8. Expanding current model validation frameworks
The current point-based validation framework, which assesses the
model at discrete sites, may not fully reveal its predictive performance.
To address this limitation, some studies (Hankey and Marshall, 2015;
Boniardi et al., 2019) introduced the line-based validation framework
that assessed the model’s ability to simulate continuous variations of air
pollution along specific routes. In addition, Zou et al., (2015a) proposed
an innovative area-based validation framework that employed infor­
mation entropy as a metric to evaluate the model’s performance in
mapping surface concentrations of air pollutants. The method provided
additional information and revealed subtle differences that the tradi­
tional point-based validation could not capture. More recently, Li et al.,
(2018b) validated the spatial patterns of PM2.5 LUR models by
comparing them with PM2.5 maps derived from MAIAC AOD products.
This study introduced the concept of verifying air pollution models using
uniformly observed spatial data.
Future studies could adopt a comprehensive validation framework
that combines point-based, line-based, and area-based methods to
appropriately evaluate a particular model. By incorporating these ap­
proaches, researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of
the strengths and limitations of LUR models, enabling them to refine and
improve the models for accurate predictions.
10.9. How to determine the spatial resolution of an LUR model
Determining the temporal resolution of an LUR model is relatively
straightforward and is primarily dictated by the temporal scale of the
14
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
training dataset. However, defining the spatial resolution of a model
poses a greater challenge. Many studies directly associated the model’s
spatial resolution with the resolution of pollution maps (ranging from
50 m to 1 km in the reviewed studies). However, we believe that this
approach may be inappropriate and inaccurate.
It is essential to recognize that a pollution map can be generated at
any desired spatial resolution based on the developed model. To illus­
trate this, consider a scenario where a model is built using measure­
ments from a sparse monitoring network comprising only 20 sites across
the entire city and coarse GIS data. While it is possible to generate a
pollution map at a fine resolution of, for example, 50 m × 50 m, the
“true” spatial resolution of the model might be at a kilometer level due
to the limitations imposed by the data used for its development.
Several factors influence the spatial resolution of a model, such as the
density and distribution of monitoring sites and the spatial scale of
predictor variables. Addressing these concerns represents a significant
research gap that necessitates further exploration. Future studies should
aim to develop appropriate methodologies for identifying the spatial
resolution of LUR models. By bridging this gap, researchers can establish
a clearer understanding of the spatial characteristics and limitations of
LUR models, leading to more informed and accurate assessments of air
pollution at various scales.
10.10. Improving the transferability of LUR models
Improving the transferability of LUR models is crucial for promoting
their wider applications in different studies (Hoek et al., 2008). Despite
the significance, most previous studies primarily focused on assessing
the ability to transfer models across different locations, with only a few
taking the additional step of investigating approaches to enhance
transferability. Miskell et al. (2015) developed a multi-scale LUR
modeling approach using datasets at the local and city scales to improve
the model’s intra-urban adaptability between the two datasets. Zalzal
et al. (2019) developed a transferable LUR model by combining data
from two cities under an assumption of spatial invariance for some of the
model coefficients. While these two methods demonstrated significant
improvements in the model’s adaptability within the given datasets, it is
important to note that the transferability of the model may still be
limited when applied to a third location that differs from the training
data. This highlights the need for future research to focus on alternative
approaches that enhance transferability without relying heavily on
costly local recalibration.
A promising approach to developing transferable LUR models lies in
the careful selection of predictor variables used during model develop­
ment. Previous studies (Hoek et al., 2008; Briggs et al., 2000) have
provided evidence that the choice of predictor variables in the final
model significantly impacts its transferability. Ma et al., (2022b) intro­
duced a method to develop transferrable neighborhood-scale NO2 LUR
models with comparable predictive power based on only micro-scale
predictor variables. The proposed models had the strongest direct
transferability and moderate-to-good indirect transferability but with
much better model interpretability. The findings of this study hold
considerable significance as they inspire researchers to delve into novel
approaches aimed at enhancing the transferability of LUR models,
particularly by focusing on the selection of predictor variables. Another
notable gap in the current literature is the lack of knowledge about the
transferability of those models developed using ML algorithms. There­
fore, future studies could focus on this aspect.
10.11. Extension to 3D estimates of spatial variations of air pollution
LUR modeling has traditionally focused on estimating pollution
surfaces in a two-dimensional manner. However, recent studies have
demonstrated its potential to incorporate vertical variations in air pol­
lutants, thus enabling three-dimensional applications. Ho et al. (2015)
measured PM2.5 and elements at different heights in Kaohsiung and
X. Ma et al.
developed models to fit vertical variations of measurements. The results
showed that floor level was identified as a predictor variable in the
PM2.5, Si, and Fe models. Building upon this concept, Barratt et al.
(2018) and Jin et al. (2019) introduced the concept of vertical decay
rates and extended the ground-based LUR model to predict variations in
the vertical direction based on a linear relationship assumption. More
recently, Xu et al., (2022c) developed a nonlinear GAM model to
describe the vertical decay rates and further proposed a modeling
framework for estimating 3D PM2.5 exposure by combining a standard
LUR model with a vertical variation model.
To facilitate the modeling of city-wide 3D air quality, promising
techniques such as vehicle-based mobile monitoring, unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV)-based vertical monitoring, and lidar vertical observation
networks have emerged. These offer potential avenues for capturing
spatial variations in air pollution across different locations and heights
(Cai et al., 2020; Lv et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020b; Xiang et al., 2021).
The integration of vertical dimensions into LUR modeling opens up new
possibilities for understanding and managing air pollution in three-
dimensional space.
10.12. Extension to estimates of air quality in multiple application
scenarios
LUR approaches have predominantly been employed for estimating
outdoor air quality; however, their applicability extends beyond that
domain. Yuchi et al. (2019) carried out a pilot study that used LUR
modeling to estimate indoor air quality for 447 rooms in 342 apartments
in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. The developed blended model (a combination
of MLR and RF) explained 82 % of the variability in indoor PM2.5 con­
centrations. This pioneering application highlights the potential of LUR
approaches in diverse scenarios. To further expand their utility, future
studies could explore the application of LUR models in additional set­
tings, such as predicting air quality in subway systems and school
classrooms. By adapting and refining the modeling techniques to suit
these specific environments, LUR approaches could provide valuable
insights into modeling indoor air quality.
11. Conclusion
This paper has comprehensively reviewed the recent development of
LUR approaches for modeling spatiotemporal variations of ambient air
pollution. Through our review, we discovered that the emergence of
multi-source observations along with advances in statistical techniques
and the availability of novel predictor variables, has revolutionized LUR
approaches. These developments have enabled LUR models to encom­
pass a wider range of criteria and unregulated air pollutants. Moreover,
LUR models in the conventional spatial structure have been com­
plemented by more complex spatiotemporal structures. Some general
findings are: (1) LCM and mobile monitoring have significantly
improved our capability to obtain high-resolution air quality data, but
we should pay close attention to the data quality and reliability; (2)
involving novel predictor variables can notably improve the fitting R2 of
the models; (3) major factors contributing to the increase in spatio­
temporal modeling are fine-scale satellite data, advanced statistical
methods, and incorporation of temporally dynamic predictors; (4)
compared with linear models, advanced statistical methods can yield
better predictions when handling data with complex relationships and
interactions; (5) LUR models, as an empirical approach, have limited
transferability. Some application tools and software that can automate
LUR approaches are also recommended. We suggest that future studies
could concentrate on modeling unregulated air pollutants, introducing
novel predictor variables, optimizing predictor variable selection stra­
tegies, proposing a comprehensive validation framework, improving the
transferability of LUR models, extending LURs to 3D, and extending the
applications of LURs in multiple scenarios. A practical concern that
needs to be addressed is how to keep a balance between efficient
15
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
computation and high-quality model performance. An interesting
question that needs to be answered is how to determine the spatial
resolution of the developed LUR model. It is anticipated that the
investigation of the integration of stationary and mobile monitoring
data, the combination of remote sensing and downscaling techniques,
and the deep integration of air pollution dispersion mechanisms in the
modeling could be three research pathways to more breakthroughs in
LUR methodologies. Ultimately, this review offers insights into possible
future areas of LUR studies for other researchers.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Xuying Ma: . Bin Zou: Funding acquisition, Writing – review &
editing. Jun Deng: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review &
editing. Jay Gao: Methodology, Writing – review & editing. Ian Long­
ley: Resources. Shun Xiao: Funding acquisition, Resources. Bin Guo:
Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing. Yarui Wu: Resources.
Tingting Xu: Resources. Xin Xu: Resources. Xiaosha Yang: Resources.
Xiaoqi Wang: Resources. Zelei Tan: Resources. Yifan Wang: Re­
sources. Lidia Morawska: . Jennifer Salmond: Methodology, Re­
sources, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Helen Jeays for polishing the English writing. We
would like to express our sincere gratitude to the five anonymous re­
viewers for their invaluable feedback, which greatly contributed to
enhancing the quality of our paper.
Funding
This work was primarily funded by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant Number: 42201469; Grant Number:
41871317), China Scholarship Council (File No. 202208610078), and
the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Grant (Project Identifi­
cation Number: LP180100516). This work was also partly funded by the
Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi Province (Grant
Number: 2021SF-435) and the Science and Technology Department of
Shaanxi Province (Grant Number: 2021JM-388/01).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108430.
References
Abera, A., Mattisson, K., Eriksson, A., Ahlberg, E., Sahilu, G., Mengistie, B., Bayih, A.G.,
Aseffaa, A., Malmqvist, E., Isaxon, C., 2020. Air pollution measurements and land-
use regression in urban Sub-Saharan Africa using low-cost sensors—possibilities and
pitfalls. Atmosphere 11 (12), 1357.
Adam-Poupart, A., Brand, A., Fournier, M., Jerrett, M., Smargiassi, A., 2014.
Spatiotemporal modeling of ozone levels in Quebec (Canada): a comparison of
kriging, land-use regression (LUR), and combined Bayesian maximum entropy–LUR
approaches. Environmental Health Perspectives 122 (9), 970–976.
Adams, M.D., Massey, F., Chastko, K., Cupini, C., 2020. Spatial modelling of particulate
matter air pollution sensor measurements collected by community scientists while
X. Ma et al.
cycling, land use regression with spatial cross-validation, and applications of
machine learning for data correction. Atmospheric Environment 230, 117479.
Akita, Y., 2014. LURTools: ArcGIS Toolbox for Land Use Regression (LUR) Model.
Available Online at. https://hub.arcgis.com/content/de058ff6b6d44ac98a180fa1b
7bcbf82/about.
Akita, Y., Chen, J.C., Serre, M.L., 2012. The moving-window Bayesian maximum entropy
framework: estimation of PM2.5 yearly average concentration across the contiguous
United States. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental. Epidemiology 22 (5),
496–501.
Akita, Y., Baldasano, J.M., Beelen, R., Cirach, M., De Hoogh, K., Hoek, G.,
Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Serre, M.L., De Nazelle, A., 2014. Large scale air pollution
estimation method combining land use regression and chemical transport modeling
in a geostatistical framework. Environmental Science & Technology 48 (8),
4452–4459.
Alimissis, A., Philippopoulos, K., Tzanis, C.G., Deligiorgi, D., 2018. Spatial estimation of
urban air pollution with the use of artificial neural network models. Atmospheric
Environment 191, 205–213.
Allen, R.W., Amram, O., Wheeler, A.J., Brauer, M., 2011. The transferability of NO and
NO2 land use regression models between cities and pollutants. Atmospheric
Environment 45 (2), 369–378.
AlThuwaynee, O.F., Kim, S.W., Najemaden, M.A., Aydda, A., Balogun, A.L., Fayyadh, M.
M., Park, H.J., 2021. Demystifying uncertainty in PM10 susceptibility mapping using
variable drop-off in extreme-gradient boosting (XGB) and random forest (RF)
algorithms. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 28 (32), 43544–43566.
Amini, H., Yunesian, M., Hosseini, V., Schindler, C., Henderson, S.B., Künzli, N., 2017.
A systematic review of land use regression models for volatile organic compounds.
Atmospheric Environment 171, 1–16.
Anand, J.S., Monks, P.S., 2017. Estimating daily surface NO2 concentrations from
satellite data–a case study over Hong Kong using land use regression models.
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 17 (13), 8211–8230.
Apte, J.S., Messier, K.P., Gani, S., Brauer, M., Kirchstetter, T.W., Lunden, M.M.,
Marshall, J.D., Portier, C.J., Vermeulen, R.C., Hamburg, S.P., 2017. High-resolution
air pollution mapping with Google Street view cars: exploiting big data.
Environmental Science & Technology 51 (12), 6999–7008.
Araki, S., Shima, M., Yamamoto, K., 2018. Spatiotemporal land use random forest model
for estimating metropolitan NO2 exposure in Japan. Science of the Total
Environment 634, 1269–1277.
Awad, Y.A., Koutrakis, P., Coull, B.A., Schwartz, J., 2017. A spatio-temporal prediction
model based on support vector machine regression: Ambient Black Carbon in three
New England States. Environmental Research 159, 427–434.
Azizian, A., Ramezani, H., 2019. Assessing the Accuracy of European Center for Medium
Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Reanalysis Datasets for Estimation of Daily and
Monthly Precipitation. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research 50 (4), 777–791.
Bai, K., Li, K., Guo, J., Cheng, W. and Xu, X., 2022a. Do more frequent temperature
inversions aggravate haze pollution in China?. Geophysical Research Letters, 49(4),
p.e2021GL096458.
Bai, K., Li, K., Guo, J., Chang, N.B., 2022b. Multiscale and multisource data fusion for
full-coverage PM2.5 concentration mapping: Can spatial pattern recognition come
with modeling accuracy? ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
184, 31–44.
Bai, K., Li, K., Sun, Y., Wu, L., Zhang, Y., Chang, N.B., Li, Z., 2023. Global synthesis of
two-decade of research on improving PM2.5 estimation models: From remote
sensing and data science perspectives. Earth-Science Reviews, 104461.
Barratt, B., Lee, M., Wong, P., Tang, R., Tsui, T.H., Cheng, W., Yang, Y., Lai, P.C., Tian, L.,
Thach, T.Q. and Allen, R., 2018. A dynamic three-dimensional air pollution exposure
model for Hong Kong. Research Reports: Health Effects Institute, 2018.
Basagaña, X., Rivera, M., Aguilera, I., Agis, D., Bouso, L., Elosua, R., Foraster, M., de
Nazelle, A., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Vila, J., Künzli, N., 2012. Effect of the number of
measurement sites on land use regression models in estimating local air pollution.
Atmospheric Environment 54, 634–642.
Beelen, R., Hoek, G., Fischer, P., van den Brandt, P.A., Brunekreef, B., 2007. Estimated
long-term outdoor air pollution concentrations in a cohort study. Atmospheric
Environment 41 (7), 1343–1358.
Beelen, R., Hoek, G., Vienneau, D., Eeftens, M., Dimakopoulou, K., Pedeli, X., Tsai, M.Y.,
Künzli, N., Schikowski, T., Marcon, A., Eriksen, K.T., 2013. Development of NO2 and
NOx land use regression models for estimating air pollution exposure in 36 study
areas in Europe-The ESCAPE project. Atmospheric Environment 72, 10–23.
Bi, J., Carmona, N., Blanco, M.N., Gassett, A.J., Seto, E., Szpiro, A.A., Larson, T.V.,
Sampson, P.D., Kaufman, J.D., Sheppard, L., 2022. Publicly available low-cost sensor
measurements for PM2.5 exposure modeling: Guidance for monitor deployment and
data selection. Environment International 158, 106897.
Blanco, M.N., Bi, J., Austin, E., Larson, T.V., Marshall, J.D., Sheppard, L., 2022. Impact of
Mobile Monitoring Network Design on Air Pollution Exposure Assessment Models.
Environmental Science & Technology.
Blanco, M.N., Doubleday, A., Austin, E., Marshall, J.D., Seto, E., Larson, T. and Sheppard,
L., 2021. Design and evaluation of mobile monitoring campaigns for air pollution
exposure assessment in epidemiologic cohorts. medRxiv, pp.2021-04.
Bonczak, B., Kontokosta, C.E., 2019. Large-scale parameterization of 3D building
morphology in complex urban landscapes using aerial LiDAR and city administrative
data. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 73, 126–142.
Boniardi, L., Dons, E., Campo, L., Van Poppel, M., Int Panis, L., Fustinoni, S., 2019. Is a
land use regression model capable of predicting the cleanest route to school?
Environments 6 (8), 90.
Boubrima, A., Matigot, F., Bechkit, W., Rivano, H., Ruas, A., 2015. Optimal deployment
of wireless sensor networks for air pollution monitoring. In: In 2015 24th
16
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks (ICCCN).
IEEE, pp. 1–7.
Bozdağ, A., Dokuz, Y., Gökçek, Ö.B., 2020. Spatial prediction of PM10 concentration
using machine learning algorithms in Ankara. Turkey. Environmental Pollution 263,
114635.
Brauer, M., Hoek, G., van Vliet, P., Meliefste, K., Fischer, P., Gehring, U., Heinrich, J.,
Cyrys, J., Bellander, T., Lewne, M., Brunekreef, B., 2003. Estimating long-term
average particulate air pollution concentrations: application of traffic indicators and
geographic information systems. Epidemiology 228–239.
Briggs, D.J., Collins, S., Elliott, P., Fischer, P., Kingham, S., Lebret, E., Pryl, K., Van
Reeuwijk, H., Smallbone, K., Van Der Veen, A., 1997. Mapping urban air pollution
using GIS: a regression-based approach. International Journal of Geographical
Information Science 11 (7), 699–718.
Briggs, D.J., de Hoogh, C., Gulliver, J., Wills, J., Elliott, P., Kingham, S., Smallbone, K.,
2000. A regression-based method for mapping traffic-related air pollution:
application and testing in four contrasting urban environments. Science of the Total
Environment 253 (1–3), 151–167.
Brokamp, C., Jandarov, R., Rao, M.B., LeMasters, G., Ryan, P., 2017. Exposure
assessment models for elemental components of particulate matter in an urban
environment: A comparison of regression and random forest approaches.
Atmospheric Environment 151, 1–11.
Brokamp, C., Jandarov, R., Hossain, M., Ryan, P., 2018. Predicting daily urban fine
particulate matter concentrations using a random forest model. Environmental
Science & Technology 52 (7), 4173–4179.
Cabaneros, S.M., Calautit, J.K., Hughes, B.R., 2019. A review of artificial neural network
models for ambient air pollution prediction. Environmental Modelling & Software
119, 285–304.
Cai, M., Huang, Y., Wang, Z., 2020. Dynamic three-dimensional distribution of traffic
pollutant at urban viaduct with the governance strategy. Atmospheric Pollution
Research 11 (8), 1418–1428.
Cao, R., Li, B., Wang, Z., Peng, Z.R., Tao, S., Lou, S., 2020. Using a distributed air sensor
network to investigate the spatiotemporal patterns of PM2.5 concentrations.
Environmental Pollution 264, 114549.
Caubel, J.J., Cados, T.E., Preble, C.V., Kirchstetter, T.W., 2019. A distributed network of
100 black carbon sensors for 100 days of air quality monitoring in West Oakland.
California. Environmental Science & Technology 53 (13), 7564–7573.
Cesaroni, G., Badaloni, C., Gariazzo, C., Stafoggia, M., Sozzi, R., Davoli, M.,
Forastiere, F., 2013. Long-term exposure to urban air pollution and mortality in a
cohort of more than a million adults in Rome. Environmental Health Perspectives
121 (3), 324–331.
Chen, J., de Hoogh, K., Gulliver, J., Hoffmann, B., Hertel, O., Ketzel, M., Bauwelinck, M.,
Van Donkelaar, A., Hvidtfeldt, U.A., Katsouyanni, K., Janssen, N.A., 2019.
A comparison of linear regression, regularization, and machine learning algorithms
to develop Europe-wide spatial models of fine particles and nitrogen dioxide.
Environment International 130, 104934.
Chen, L., Wang, Y., Li, P., Ji, Y., Kong, S., Li, Z., Bai, Z., 2012. A land use regression
model incorporating data on industrial point source pollution. Journal of
Environmental Sciences 24 (7), 1251–1258.
Chen, L., Gao, S., Zhang, H., Sun, Y., Ma, Z., Vedal, S., Mao, J., Bai, Z., 2018.
Spatiotemporal modeling of PM2.5 concentrations at the national scale combining
land use regression and Bayesian maximum entropy in China. Environment
International 116, 300–307.
Chen, B., You, S., Ye, Y., Fu, Y., Ye, Z., Deng, J., Wang, K., Hong, Y., 2021. An
interpretable self-adaptive deep neural network for estimating daily spatially-
continuous PM2.5 concentrations across China. Science of the Total Environment
768, 144724.
Christakos, G., Li, X., 1998. Bayesian maximum entropy analysis and mapping: a farewell
to kriging estimators? Mathematical Geology 30 (4), 435–462.
Cihan, P., Ozel, H., Ozcan, H.K., 2021. Modeling of atmospheric particulate matters via
artificial intelligence methods. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 193 (5),
1–15.
Clifford, S., Choy, S.L., Hussein, T., Mengersen, K., Morawska, L., 2011. Using the
generalised additive model to model the particle number count of ultrafine particles.
Atmospheric Environment 45 (32), 5934–5945.
Coker, E.S., Amegah, A.K., Mwebaze, E., Ssematimba, J., Bainomugisha, E., 2021. A Land
Use Regression Model using Machine Learning and Locally Developed Low Cost
Particulate Matter Sensors in Uganda. Environmental Research, 111352.
Considine, E.M., Reid, C.E., Ogletree, M.R., Dye, T., 2021. Improving accuracy of air
pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost
airborne particulate matter sensor network. Environmental Pollution 268, 115833.
Cowie, C.T., Garden, F., Jegasothy, E., Knibbs, L.D., Hanigan, I., Morley, D., Hansell, A.,
Hoek, G., Marks, G.B., 2019. Comparison of model estimates from an intra-city land
use regression model with a national satellite-LUR and a regional Bayesian
Maximum Entropy model, in estimating NO2 for a birth cohort in Sydney, Australia.
Environmental Research 174, 24–34.
de Hoogh, K., Wang, M., Adam, M., Badaloni, C., Beelen, R., Birk, M., Cesaroni, G.,
Cirach, M., Declercq, C., Dedele, A., Dons, E., 2013. Development of land use
regression models for particle composition in twenty study areas in Europe.
Environmental Science & Technology 47 (11), 5778–5786.
de Hoogh, K., Gulliver, J., van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R.V., Marshall, J.D., Bechle, M.J.,
Cesaroni, G., Pradas, M.C., Dedele, A., Eeftens, M., Forsberg, B., 2016. Development
of West-European PM2.5 and NO2 land use regression models incorporating
satellite-derived and chemical transport modelling data. Environmental Research
151, 1–10.
X. Ma et al.
de Hoogh, K., Héritier, H., Stafoggia, M., Künzli, N., Kloog, I., 2018. Modelling daily
PM2.5 concentrations at high spatio-temporal resolution across Switzerland.
Environmental Pollution 233, 1147–1154.
de Hoogh, K., Saucy, A., Shtein, A., Schwartz, J., West, E.A., Strassmann, A., Puhan, M.,
Roosli, M., Stafoggia, M., Kloog, I., 2019. Predicting fine-scale daily NO2 for
2005–2016 incorporating OMI satellite data across Switzerland. Environmental
Science & Technology 53 (17), 10279–10287.
DeLang, M.N., Becker, J.S., Chang, K.L., Serre, M.L., Cooper, O.R., Schultz, M.G.,
Schröder, S., Lu, X., Zhang, L., Deushi, M., Josse, B., 2021. Mapping yearly fine
resolution global surface ozone through the Bayesian Maximum Entropy data fusion
of observations and model output for 1990–2017. Environmental Science &
Technology 55 (8), 4389–4398.
Di, Q., Koutrakis, P., Schwartz, J., 2016. A hybrid prediction model for PM2.5 mass and
components using a chemical transport model and land use regression. Atmospheric
Environment 131, 390–399.
Di, Q., Amini, H., Shi, L., Kloog, I., Silvern, R., Kelly, J., Sabath, M.B., Choirat, C.,
Koutrakis, P., Lyapustin, A., Wang, Y., 2019. Assessing NO2 concentration and
model uncertainty with high spatiotemporal resolution across the contiguous United
States using ensemble model averaging. Environmental Science & Technology 54
(3), 1372–1384.
Dong, J., Ma, R., Cai, P., Liu, P., Yue, H., Zhang, X., Xu, Q., Li, R., Song, X., 2021. Effect of
sample number and location on accuracy of land use regression model in NO2
prediction. Atmospheric Environment 246, 118057.
Dons, E., Van Poppel, M., Kochan, B., Wets, G., Panis, L.I., 2013. Modeling temporal and
spatial variability of traffic-related air pollution: Hourly land use regression models
for black carbon. Atmospheric Environment 74, 237–246.
Eeftens, M., Beelen, R., De Hoogh, K., Bellander, T., Cesaroni, G., Cirach, M.,
Declercq, C., Dedele, A., Dons, E., De Nazelle, A., Dimakopoulou, K., 2012.
Development of land use regression models for PM2.5, PM2.5 absorbance, PM10 and
PMcoarse in 20 European study areas; results of the ESCAPE project. Environmental
Science & Technology 46 (20), 11195–11205.
Eeftens, M., Beekhuizen, J., Beelen, R., Wang, M., Vermeulen, R., Brunekreef, B.,
Huss, A., Hoek, G., 2013. Quantifying urban street configuration for improvements
in air pollution models. Atmospheric Environment 72, 1–9.
Friedman, J.H., 1991. Multivariate adaptive regression splines. The Annals of Statistics
19 (1), 1–67.
Gan, W.Q., Koehoorn, M., Davies, H.W., Demers, P.A., Tamburic, L., Brauer, M., 2011.
Long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution and the risk of coronary heart
disease hospitalization and mortality. Environmental Health Perspectives 119 (4),
501–507.
Ganji, A., Minet, L., Weichenthal, S., Hatzopoulou, M., 2020. Predicting traffic-related air
pollution using feature extraction from built environment images. Environmental
Science & Technology 54 (17), 10688–10699.
Garcia, J.M., Teodoro, F., Cerdeira, R., Coelho, L.M.R., Kumar, P., Carvalho, M.G., 2016.
Developing a methodology to predict PM10 concentrations in urban areas using
generalized linear models. Environmental Technology 37 (18), 2316–2325.
Gerling, L., Löschau, G., Wiedensohler, A., Weber, S., 2020. Statistical modelling of
roadside and urban background ultrafine and accumulation mode particle number
concentrations using generalized additive models. Science of the Total Environment
703, 134570.
Ghassoun, Y., Löwner, M.O., Weber, S., 2019. Wind direction related parameters
improve the performance of a land use regression model for ultrafine particles.
Atmospheric Pollution Research 10 (4), 1180–1189.
Goldberg, D.L., Lu, Z., Streets, D.G., de Foy, B., Griffin, D., McLinden, C.A., Lamsal, L.N.,
Krotkov, N.A., Eskes, H., 2019. Enhanced capabilities of TROPOMI NO2: estimating
NOx from North American cities and power plants. Environmental Science &
Technology 53 (21), 12594–12601.
Gujral, H., Sinha, A., 2021. Association between exposure to airborne pollutants and
COVID-19 in Los Angeles, United States with ensemble-based dynamic emission
model. Environmental Research 194, 110704.
Guo, R., Qi, Y., Zhao, B., Pei, Z., Wen, F., Wu, S., Zhang, Q., 2022. High-Resolution Urban
Air Quality Mapping for Multiple Pollutants Based on Dense Monitoring Data and
Machine Learning. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health 19 (13), 8005.
Guo, B., Wang, X., Zhang, D., Pei, L., Zhang, D., Wang, X., 2020. A land use regression
application into simulating spatial distribution characteristics of particulate matter
(PM2.5) concentration in city of Xi’an. China. Polish Journal of Environmental
Studies 29 (6).
Guo, B., Wang, X., Pei, L., Su, Y., Zhang, D., Wang, Y., 2021a. Identifying the
spatiotemporal dynamic of PM2.5 concentrations at multiple scales using
geographically and temporally weighted regression model across China during
2015–2018. Science of the Total Environment 751, 141765.
Guo, B., Wang, Y., Pei, L., Yu, Y., Liu, F., Zhang, D., Wang, X., Su, Y., Zhang, D.,
Zhang, B., Guo, H., 2021b. Determining the effects of socioeconomic and
environmental determinants on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
mortality using geographically and temporally weighted regression model across
Xi’an during 2014–2016. Science of the Total Environment 756, 143869.
Guttikunda, S.K., Goel, R., Pant, P., 2014. Nature of air pollution, emission sources, and
management in the Indian cities. Atmospheric Environment 95, 501–510.
Guttikunda, S.K., Gurjar, B.R., 2012. Role of meteorology in seasonality of air pollution
in megacity Delhi. India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 184 (5),
3199–3211.
Han, P., Mei, H., Liu, D., Zeng, N., Tang, X., Wang, Y., Pan, Y., 2021. Calibrations of Low-
Cost Air Pollution Monitoring Sensors for CO, NO2, O3, and SO2. Sensors 21 (1),
256.
17
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
Han, L., Zhao, J., Gao, Y., Gu, Z., Xin, K., Zhang, J., 2020. Spatial distribution
characteristics of PM2. 5 and PM10 in Xi’an City predicted by land use regression
models. Sustainable Cities and Society 61, 102329.
Hankey, S., Marshall, J.D., 2015. Land use regression models of on-road particulate air
pollution (particle number, black carbon, PM2.5, particle size) using mobile
monitoring. Environmental Science & Technology 49 (15), 9194–9202.
Hankey, S., Sforza, P., Pierson, M., 2019. Using mobile monitoring to develop hourly
empirical models of particulate air pollution in a rural Appalachian community.
Environmental Science & Technology 53 (8), 4305–4315.
Hao, J., He, K., Duan, L., Li, J., Wang, L., 2007. Air pollution and its control in China.
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering in China 1 (2), 129–142.
Hassanpour Matikolaei, S.A.H., Jamshidi, H., Samimi, A., 2019. Characterizing the effect
of traffic density on ambient CO, NO2, and PM2.5 in Tehran, Iran: an hourly land-use
regression model. Transportation Letters 11 (8), 436–446.
Hatzopoulou, M., Valois, M.F., Levy, I., Mihele, C., Lu, G., Bagg, S., Minet, L., Brook, J.,
2017. Robustness of land-use regression models developed from mobile air pollutant
measurements. Environmental Science & Technology 51 (7), 3938–3947.
He, B., Heal, M.R., Reis, S., 2018. Land-use regression modelling of intra-urban air
pollution variation in China: current status and future needs. Atmosphere 9 (4), 134.
Henderson, S.B., Beckerman, B., Jerrett, M., Brauer, M., 2007. Application of land use
regression to estimate long-term concentrations of traffic-related nitrogen oxides and
fine particulate matter. Environmental Science & Technology 41 (7), 2422–2428.
Ho, C.C., Chan, C.C., Cho, C.W., Lin, H.I., Lee, J.H., Wu, C.F., 2015. Land use regression
modeling with vertical distribution measurements for fine particulate matter and
elements in an urban area. Atmospheric Environment 104, 256–263.
Hoek, G., Beelen, R., De Hoogh, K., Vienneau, D., Gulliver, J., Fischer, P., Briggs, D.,
2008. A review of land-use regression models to assess spatial variation of outdoor
air pollution. Atmospheric Environment 42 (33), 7561–7578.
Hoek, G., Beelen, R., Kos, G., Dijkema, M., Zee, S.C.V.D., Fischer, P.H., Brunekreef, B.,
2011. Land use regression model for ultrafine particles in Amsterdam.
Environmental Science & Technology 45 (2), 622–628.
Hu, K., Rahman, A., Bhrugubanda, H., Sivaraman, V., 2017. HazeEst: Machine learning
based metropolitan air pollution estimation from fixed and mobile sensors. IEEE
Sensors Journal 17 (11), 3517–3525.
Hu, X., Waller, L.A., Al-Hamdan, M.Z., Crosson, W.L., Estes Jr, M.G., Estes, S.M.,
Quattrochi, D.A., Sarnat, J.A., Liu, Y., 2013. Estimating ground-level PM2.5
concentrations in the southeastern US using geographically weighted regression.
Environmental Research 121, 1–10.
Huang, C., Hu, J., Xue, T., Xu, H. and Wang, M., 2021. High-resolution spatiotemporal
modeling for ambient PM2. 5 exposure assessment in China from 2013 to 2019.
Environmental Science & Technology, 55(3), pp.2152-2162.
Huang, C.S., Lin, T.H., Hung, H., Kuo, C.P., Ho, C.C., Guo, Y.L., Chen, K.C., Wu, C.F.,
2019. Incorporating satellite-derived data with annual and monthly land use
regression models for estimating spatial distribution of air pollution. Environmental
Modelling & Software 114, 181–187.
Huang, L., Zhang, C., Bi, J., 2017. Development of land use regression models for PM2.5,
SO2, NO2 and O3 in Nanjing. China. Environmental Research 158, 542–552.
Huang, L., Qian, H., Deng, S., Guo, J., Li, Y., Zhao, W., Yue, Y., 2018. Urban residential
indoor volatile organic compounds in summer, Beijing: Profile, concentration and
source characterization. Atmospheric Environment 188, 1–11.
Huang, C., Sun, K., Hu, J., Xue, T., Xu, H., Wang, M., 2022. Estimating 2013–2019 NO2
exposure with high spatiotemporal resolution in China using an ensemble model.
Environmental Pollution 292, 118285.
Jerrett, M., Arain, A., Kanaroglou, P., Beckerman, B., Potoglou, D., Sahsuvaroglu, T.,
Morrison, J., Giovis, C., 2005. A review and evaluation of intraurban air pollution
exposure models. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology 15
(2), 185–204.
Ji, G., Tian, L., Zhao, J., Yue, Y., Wang, Z., 2019. Detecting spatiotemporal dynamics of
PM2.5 emission data in China using DMSP-OLS nighttime stable light data. Journal of
Cleaner Production 209, 363–370.
Jin, L., Berman, J.D., Warren, J.L., Levy, J.I., Thurston, G., Zhang, Y., Xu, X., Wang, S.,
Zhang, Y., Bell, M.L., 2019. A land use regression model of nitrogen dioxide and fine
particulate matter in a complex urban core in Lanzhou. China. Environmental
Research 177, 108597.
Just, A.C., Wright, R.O., Schwartz, J., Coull, B.A., Baccarelli, A.A., Tellez-Rojo, M.M.,
Moody, E., Wang, Y., Lyapustin, A., Kloog, I., 2015. Using high-resolution satellite
aerosol optical depth to estimate daily PM2.5 geographical distribution in Mexico
City. Environmental Science & Technology 49 (14), 8576–8584.
Keller, J.P., Olives, C., Kim, S.Y., Sheppard, L., Sampson, P.D., Szpiro, A.A., Oron, A.P.,
Lindström, J., Vedal, S., Kaufman, J.D., 2015. A unified spatiotemporal modeling
approach for predicting concentrations of multiple air pollutants in the multi-ethnic
study of atherosclerosis and air pollution. Environmental Health Perspectives 123
(4), 301–309.
Kerckhoffs, J., Hoek, G., Messier, K.P., Brunekreef, B., Meliefste, K., Klompmaker, J.O.,
Vermeulen, R., 2016. Comparison of ultrafine particle and black carbon
concentration predictions from a mobile and short-term stationary land-use
regression model. Environmental Science & Technology 50 (23), 12894–12902.
Kerckhoffs, J., Hoek, G., Portengen, L., Brunekreef, B., Vermeulen, R.C., 2019.
Performance of prediction algorithms for modeling outdoor air pollution spatial
surfaces. Environmental Science & Technology 53 (3), 1413–1421.
Kerckhoffs, J., Khan, J., Hoek, G., Yuan, Z., Ellermann, T., Hertel, O., Ketzel, M.,
Jensen, S.S., Meliefste, K., Vermeulen, R., 2022. Mixed-Effects Modeling Framework
for Amsterdam and Copenhagen for Outdoor NO2 Concentrations Using
Measurements Sampled with Google Street View Cars. Environmental Science &
Technology.
X. Ma et al.
Kheirbek, I., Johnson, S., Ross, Z., Pezeshki, G., Ito, K., Eisl, H., Matte, T., 2012. Spatial
variability in levels of benzene, formaldehyde, and total benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene and xylenes in New York City: a land-use regression study.
Environmental Health 11, 1–12.
Kim, M., Brunner, D., Kuhlmann, G., 2021. Importance of satellite observations for high-
resolution mapping of near-surface NO2 by machine learning. Remote Sensing of
Environment 264, 112573.
Kisi, O., Parmar, K.S., Soni, K., Demir, V., 2017. Modeling of air pollutants using least
square support vector regression, multivariate adaptive regression spline, and M5
model tree models. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health 10 (7), 873–883.
Kloog, I., Koutrakis, P., Coull, B.A., Lee, H.J., Schwartz, J., 2011. Assessing temporally
and spatially resolved PM2.5 exposures for epidemiological studies using satellite
aerosol optical depth measurements. Atmospheric Environment 45 (35), 6267–6275.
Kloog, I., Chudnovsky, A.A., Just, A.C., Nordio, F., Koutrakis, P., Coull, B.A.,
Lyapustin, A., Wang, Y., Schwartz, J., 2014. A new hybrid spatio-temporal model for
estimating daily multi-year PM2.5 concentrations across northeastern USA using
high resolution aerosol optical depth data. Atmospheric Environment 95, 581–590.
Knibbs, L.D., Hewson, M.G., Bechle, M.J., Marshall, J.D., Barnett, A.G., 2014. A national
satellite-based land-use regression model for air pollution exposure assessment in
Australia. Environmental Research 135, 204–211.
Korek, M., Johansson, C., Svensson, N., Lind, T., Beelen, R., Hoek, G., Pershagen, G.,
Bellander, T., 2017. Can dispersion modeling of air pollution be improved by land-
use regression? An example from Stockholm, Sweden. Journal of Exposure Science &
Environmental Epidemiology 27 (6), 575–581.
Kummu, M., Taka, M., Guillaume, J.H., 2018. Gridded global datasets for gross domestic
product and Human Development Index over 1990–2015. Scientific Data 5 (1),
1–15.
Larkin, A., Geddes, J.A., Martin, R.V., Xiao, Q., Liu, Y., Marshall, J.D., Brauer, M.,
Hystad, P., 2017. Global land use regression model for nitrogen dioxide air pollution.
Environmental Science & Technology 51 (12), 6957–6964.
Lautenschlager, F., Becker, M., Kobs, K., Steininger, M., Davidson, P., Krause, A.,
Hotho, A., 2020. OpenLUR: Off-the-shelf air pollution modeling with open features
and machine learning. Atmospheric Environment 233, 117535.
Lee, H.J., 2019. Benefits of high resolution PM2.5 prediction using satellite MAIAC AOD
and land use regression for exposure assessment: California examples.
Environmental Science & Technology 53 (21), 12774–12783.
Lee, H.J., Chatfield, R.B., Strawa, A.W., 2016. Enhancing the applicability of satellite
remote sensing for PM2.5 estimation using MODIS deep blue AOD and land use
regression in California, United States. Environmental Science & Technology 50
(12), 6546–6555.
Leung, Y., Zhou, Y., Lam, K.Y., Fung, T., Cheung, K.Y., Kim, T., Jung, H., 2019.
Integration of air pollution data collected by mobile sensors and ground-based
stations to derive a spatiotemporal air pollution profile of a city. International
Journal of Geographical Information Science 33 (11), 2218–2240.
Li, R. 2022. Easy land use regression software (eLUR) for detailed and fast air pollution
modeling. https://pan.baidu.com/s/15ggXOerrb0GBilFHTTL30w, Code: hdvz.
Li, H.Z., Dallmann, T.R., Li, X., Gu, P., Presto, A.A., 2018a. Urban organic aerosol
exposure: spatial variations in composition and source impacts. Environmental
Science & Technology 52 (2), 415–426.
Li, J., Huang, L., Han, B., van der Kuijp, T.J., Xia, Y., Chen, K., 2021. Exposure and
perception of PM2.5 pollution on the mental stress of pregnant women. Environment
International 156, 106686.
Li, X., Liu, W., Chen, Z., Zeng, G., Hu, C., León, T., Liang, J., Huang, G., Gao, Z., Li, Z.,
Yan, W., 2015. The application of semicircular-buffer-based land use regression
models incorporating wind direction in predicting quarterly NO2 and PM10
concentrations. Atmospheric Environment 103, 18–24.
Li, R., Ma, T., Xu, Q., Song, X., 2018b. Using MAIAC AOD to verify the PM2.5 spatial
patterns of a land use regression model. Environmental Pollution 243, 501–509.
Li, S., Zhai, L., Zou, B., Sang, H., Fang, X., 2017. A generalized additive model combining
principal component analysis for PM2.5 concentration estimation. ISPRS
International Journal of Geo-Information 6 (8), 248.
Li, Z., Zhang, H., Wen, C.Y., Yang, A.S., Juan, Y.H., 2020. Effects of frontal area density
on outdoor thermal comfort and air quality. Building and Environment 180, 107028.
Li, S., Zou, B., Ma, X., Liu, N., Zhang, Z., Xie, M., Zhi, L., 2023. Improving air quality
through urban form optimization: A review study. Building and Environment
110685.
Lim, C.C., Hayes, R.B., Ahn, J., Shao, Y., Silverman, D.T., Jones, R.R., Garcia, C.,
Thurston, G.D., 2018. Association between long-term exposure to ambient air
pollution and diabetes mortality in the US. Environmental Research 165, 330–336.
Lim, C.C., Kim, H., Vilcassim, M.R., Thurston, G.D., Gordon, T., Chen, L.C., Lee, K.,
Heimbinder, M., Kim, S.Y., 2019. Mapping urban air quality using mobile sampling
with low-cost sensors and machine learning in Seoul. South Korea. Environment
International 131, 105022.
Lindström, J., Szpiro, A., Sampson, P.D., Bergen, S. and Sheppard, L., 2013.
Spatiotemporal: An r package for spatio-temporal modelling of air-pollution. J stat
softw (in press)(http://cran. rproject. org/web/packages/SpatioTemporal/index.
html).
Liu, J., 2021. Mapping high resolution national daily NO2 exposure across mainland
China using an ensemble algorithm. Environmental Pollution 279, 116932.
Liu, J., Banerjee, S., Oroumiyeh, F., Shen, J., Del Rosario, I., Lipsitt, J., Paulson, S.,
Ritz, B., Su, J., Weichenthal, S., Lakey, P., 2022. Cokriging with a low-cost sensor
network to estimate spatial variation of brake and tire-wear metals and oxidative
stress potential in Southern California. Environment International 168, 107481.
Liu, M., Chen, H., Wei, D., Wu, Y., Li, C., 2021a. Nonlinear relationship between urban
form and street-level PM2.5 and CO based on mobile measurements and gradient
boosting decision tree models. Building and Environment 205, 108265.
18
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
Liu, Z., Guan, Q., Luo, H., Wang, N., Pan, N., Yang, L., Xiao, S., Lin, J., 2019b.
Development of land use regression model and health risk assessment for NO2 in
different functional areas: A case study of Xi’an, China. Atmospheric Environment
213, 515–525.
Liu, Z., Guan, Q., Lin, J., Yang, L., Luo, H., Wang, N., 2021b. A new buffer selection
strategy for land use regression model of PM2.5 in Xi’an, China. Environmental
Science and Pollution Research 28 (17), 21245–21255.
Liu, H., He, K., 2016. China keeps carrying forward the key special project of “Air
Pollution Causes and Control”. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering 10
(5), 18.
Liu, W., Li, X., Chen, Z., Zeng, G., León, T., Liang, J., Huang, G., Gao, Z., Jiao, S., He, X.,
Lai, M., 2015. Land use regression models coupled with meteorology to model
spatial and temporal variability of NO2 and PM10 in Changsha, China. Atmospheric
Environment 116, 272–280.
Liu, M., Peng, X., Meng, Z., Zhou, T., Long, L., She, Q., 2019a. Spatial characteristics and
determinants of in-traffic black carbon in Shanghai, China: Combination of mobile
monitoring and land use regression model. Science of the Total Environment 658,
51–61.
Lu, M., Soenario, I., Helbich, M., Schmitz, O., Hoek, G., van der Molen, M.,
Karssenberg, D., 2020. Land use regression models revealing spatiotemporal co-
variation in NO2, NO, and O3 in the Netherlands. Atmospheric Environment 223,
117238.
Lv, L., Xiang, Y., Zhang, T., Chai, W., Liu, W., 2020. A synergistic approach for regional
particle pollution tracking using multiple mobile vehicle-based lidars. Atmospheric
Environment 233, 117585.
Ma, R., Ban, J., Wang, Q., Li, T., 2020a. Statistical spatial-temporal modeling of ambient
ozone exposure for environmental epidemiology studies: A review. Science of the
Total Environment 701, 134463.
Ma, R., Ban, J., Wang, Q., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., He, M.Z., Li, S., Shi, W., Li, T., 2021b.
Random forest model based fine scale spatiotemporal O3 trends in the Beijing-
Tianjin-Hebei region in China, 2010 to 2017. Environmental Pollution 276, 116635.
Ma, Z., Dey, S., Christopher, S., Liu, R., Bi, J., Balyan, P., Liu, Y., 2022b. A review of
statistical methods used for developing large-scale and long-term PM2.5 models
from satellite data. Remote Sensing of Environment 269, 112827.
Ma, X., Longley, I., Gao, J., Kachhara, A., Salmond, J., 2019. A site-optimised multi-scale
GIS based land use regression model for simulating local scale patterns in air
pollution. Science of the Total Environment 685, 134–149.
Ma, X., Longley, I., Gao, J., Salmond, J., 2020b. Evaluating the Effect of Ambient
Concentrations, Route Choices, and Environmental (in) Justice on Students’ Dose of
Ambient NO2 While Walking to School at Population Scales. Environmental Science
& Technology 54 (20), 12908–12919.
Ma, X., Longley, I., Gao, J., Salmond, J., 2020c. Assessing schoolchildren’s exposure to
air pollution during the daily commute-A systematic review. Science of the Total
Environment, 140389.
Ma, X., Longley, I., Salmond, J., Gao, J., 2020d. PyLUR: Efficient software for land use
regression modeling the spatial distribution of air pollutants using GDAL/OGR
library in Python. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering 14 (3), 44.
Ma, X., Gao, J., Longley, I., Zou, B., Guo, B., Xu, X., Salmond, J., 2022a. Development of
transferable neighborhood land use regression models for predicting intra-urban
ambient nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pollution exposure. Environmental Science and
Pollution Research 1–16.
Ma, M., Yao, G., Guo, J., Bai, K., 2021a. Distinct spatiotemporal variation patterns of
surface ozone in China due to diverse influential factors. Journal of Environmental
Management 288, 112368.
MacIntyre, E.A., Karr, C.J., Koehoorn, M., Demers, P.A., Tamburic, L., Lencar, C.,
Brauer, M., 2011. Residential air pollution and otitis media during the first two years
of life. Epidemiology 81–89.
Maddix, M., Adams, M.D., 2020. Effects of spatial sampling density and spatial extent on
linear land use regression modelling of NO2 estimates in an automobile-oriented
city. Atmospheric Environment 238, 117735.
Madsen, C., Carlsen, K.C.L., Hoek, G., Oftedal, B., Nafstad, P., Meliefste, K., Jacobsen, R.,
Nystad, W., Carlsen, K.H., Brunekreef, B., 2007. Modeling the intra-urban variability
of outdoor traffic pollution in Oslo, Norway—A GA2LEN project. Atmospheric
Environment 41 (35), 7500–7511.
Mahanta, S., Ramakrishnudu, T., Jha, R.R., Tailor, N., 2019, October.. Urban air quality
prediction using regression analysis. In: TENCON 2019–2019 IEEE Region 10
Conference (TENCON). IEEE, pp. 1118–1123.
Mandal, S., Madhipatla, K., Prabhakaran, D., Schwartz, J., 2019. High resolution
spatiotemporal assessment of ambient air pollution using ensemble modeling and
links with hypertension in a Delhi based cohort. Environmental Epidemiology 3,
259.
Mandal, S., Madhipatla, K.K., Guttikunda, S., Kloog, I., Prabhakaran, D., Schwartz, J.D.
and Team, G.H.I., 2020. Ensemble averaging based assessment of spatiotemporal
variations in ambient PM2.5 concentrations over Delhi, India, during 2010–2016.
Atmospheric Environment 224, 117309.
Mao, F., Khamis, K., Krause, S., Clark, J., Hannah, D.M., 2019. Low-cost environmental
sensor networks: recent advances and future directions. Frontiers in Earth Science 7,
221.
Mao, L., Qiu, Y., Kusano, C., Xu, X., 2012. Predicting regional space–time variation of
PM2.5 with land-use regression model and MODIS data. Environmental Science and
Pollution Research 19 (1), 128–138.
Marcon, A., de Hoogh, K., Gulliver, J., Beelen, R., Hansell, A.L., 2015. Development and
transferability of a nitrogen dioxide land use regression model within the Veneto
region of Italy. Atmospheric Environment 122, 696–704.
Marcos, R., González-Reviriego, N., Torralba, V., Soret, A., Doblas-Reyes, F.J., 2019.
Characterization of the near surface wind speed distribution at global scale: Era-
X. Ma et al.
interim reanalysis and ecmwf seasonal forecasting system 4. Climate Dynamics 52
(5), 3307–3319.
Marjovi, A., Arfire, A. and Martinoli, A., 2015, June. High resolution air pollution maps
in urban environments using mobile sensor networks. In 2015 International
Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (pp. 11-20). IEEE.
Masiol, M., Zíková, N., Chalupa, D.C., Rich, D.Q., Ferro, A.R., Hopke, P.K., 2018. Hourly
land-use regression models based on low-cost PM monitor data. Environmental
Research 167, 7–14.
Masiol, M., Squizzato, S., Chalupa, D., Rich, D.Q., Hopke, P.K., 2019. Spatial-temporal
variations of summertime ozone concentrations across a metropolitan area using a
network of low-cost monitors to develop 24 hourly land-use regression models.
Science of the Total Environment 654, 1167–1178.
Meng, X., Fu, Q., Ma, Z., Chen, L., Zou, B., Zhang, Y., Xue, W., Wang, J., Wang, D.,
Kan, H., Liu, Y., 2016. Estimating ground-level PM10 in a Chinese city by combining
satellite data, meteorological information and a land use regression model.
Environmental Pollution 208, 177–184.
Meng, X., Hand, J.L., Schichtel, B.A., Liu, Y., 2018. Space-time trends of PM2.5
constituents in the conterminous United States estimated by a machine learning
approach, 2005–2015. Environment International 121, 1137–1147.
Mercer, L.D., Szpiro, A.A., Sheppard, L., Lindström, J., Adar, S.D., Allen, R.W., Avol, E.L.,
Oron, A.P., Larson, T., Liu, L.J.S., Kaufman, J.D., 2011. Comparing universal kriging
and land-use regression for predicting concentrations of gaseous oxides of nitrogen
(NOx) for the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and Air Pollution (MESA Air).
Atmospheric Environment 45 (26), 4412–4420.
Messier, K.P., Chambliss, S.E., Gani, S., Alvarez, R., Brauer, M., Choi, J.J., Hamburg, S.P.,
Kerckhoffs, J., LaFranchi, B., Lunden, M.M., Marshall, J.D., 2018. Mapping air
pollution with Google Street View cars: Efficient approaches with mobile monitoring
and land use regression. Environmental Science & Technology 52 (21),
12563–12572.
Miao, C., Yu, S., Hu, Y., Zhang, H., He, X., Chen, W., 2020. Review of methods used to
estimate the sky view factor in urban street canyons. Building and Environment 168,
106497.
Michanowicz, D.R., Shmool, J.L., Cambal, L., Tunno, B.J., Gillooly, S., Hunt, M.J.O.,
Tripathy, S., Shields, K.N., Clougherty, J.E., 2016a. A hybrid land use regression/
line-source dispersion model for predicting intra-urban NO2. Transportation
Research Part d: Transport and Environment 43, 181–191.
Michanowicz, D.R., Shmool, J.L., Tunno, B.J., Tripathy, S., Gillooly, S., Kinnee, E.,
Clougherty, J.E., 2016b. A hybrid land use regression/AERMOD model for
predicting intra-urban variation in PM2.5. Atmospheric Environment 131, 307–315.
Miller, D.J., Actkinson, B., Padilla, L., Griffin, R.J., Moore, K., Lewis, P.G.T., Gardner-
Frolick, R., Craft, E., Portier, C.J., Hamburg, S.P., Alvarez, R.A., 2020. Characterizing
elevated urban air pollutant spatial patterns with mobile monitoring in Houston.
Texas. Environmental Science & Technology 54 (4), 2133–2142.
Miller, K.A., Siscovick, D.S., Sheppard, L., Shepherd, K., Sullivan, J.H., Anderson, G.L.,
Kaufman, J.D., 2007. Long-term exposure to air pollution and incidence of
cardiovascular events in women. New England Journal of Medicine 356 (5),
447–458.
Minet, L., Liu, R., Valois, M.F., Xu, J., Weichenthal, S., Hatzopoulou, M., 2018.
Development and comparison of air pollution exposure surfaces derived from on-
road mobile monitoring and short-term stationary sidewalk measurements.
Environmental Science & Technology 52 (6), 3512–3519.
Mirzaei, M., Bertazzon, S., Couloigner, I., Farjad, B., Ngom, R., 2020. Estimation of local
daily PM2.5 concentration during wildfire episodes: integrating MODIS AOD with
multivariate linear mixed effect (LME) models. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health 13
(2), 173–185.
Miskell, G., Salmond, J., Longley, I., Dirks, K.N., 2015. A novel approach in quantifying
the effect of urban design features on local-scale air pollution in central urban areas.
Environmental Science & Technology 49 (15), 9004–9011.
Miskell, G., Salmond, J., Williams, D.E., 2017. Low-cost sensors and crowd-sourced data:
Observations of siting impacts on a network of air-quality instruments. Science of the
Total Environment 575, 1119–1129.
Miskell, G., Salmond, J.A., Williams, D.E., 2018a. Solution to the problem of calibration
of low-cost air quality measurement sensors in networks. ACS Sensors 3 (4),
832–843.
Miskell, G., Salmond, J.A., Williams, D.E., 2018b. Use of a handheld low-cost sensor to
explore the effect of urban design features on local-scale spatial and temporal air
quality variability. Science of the Total Environment 619, 480–490.
Mogollón-Sotelo, C., Casallas, A., Vidal, S., Celis, N., Ferro, C., Belalcazar, L., 2021.
A support vector machine model to forecast ground-level PM2.5 in a highly populated
city with a complex terrain. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health 14 (3), 399–409.
Mölter, A., 2020. XLUR: A land use regression wizard for ArcGIS Pro. Journal of Open
Source Software 5 (50), 2177.
Mölter, A., Lindley, S., 2021. Developing land use regression models for environmental
science research using the XLUR tool–more than a one-trick pony. Environmental
Modelling & Software, 105108.
Morley, D.W., Gulliver, J., 2018. A land use regression variable generation, modelling
and prediction tool for air pollution exposure assessment. Environmental Modelling
& Software 105, 17–23.
Munir, S., Mayfield, M., Coca, D., Mihaylova, L.S., 2020. A nonlinear land use regression
approach for modelling NO2 concentrations in urban areas—Using data from low-
cost sensors and diffusion tubes. Atmosphere 11 (7), 736.
Naughton, O., Donnelly, A., Nolan, P., Pilla, F., Misstear, B.D., Broderick, B., 2018.
A land use regression model for explaining spatial variation in air pollution levels
using a wind sector based approach. Science of the Total Environment 630,
1324–1334.
19
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
Nelder, J.A., Wedderburn, R.W., 1972. Generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society: Series A (general) 135 (3), 370–384.
Nieto, P.G., Antón, J.Á., 2014. Nonlinear air quality modeling using multivariate
adaptive regression splines in Gijón urban area (Northern Spain) at local scale.
Applied Mathematics and Computation 235, 50–65.
Nori-Sarma, A., Thimmulappa, R.K., Venkataramana, G.V., Fauzie, A.K., Dey, S.K.,
Venkareddy, L.K., Berman, J.D., Lane, K.J., Fong, K.C., Warren, J.L., Bell, M.L., 2020.
Low-cost NO2 monitoring and predictions of urban exposure using universal kriging
and land-use regression modelling in Mysore. India. Atmospheric Environment 226,
117395.
Noth, E.M., Hammond, S.K., Biging, G.S., Tager, I.B., 2011. A spatial-temporal regression
model to predict daily outdoor residential PAH concentrations in an epidemiologic
study in Fresno. CA. Atmospheric Environment 45 (14), 2394–2403.
Novotny, E.V., Bechle, M.J., Millet, D.B., Marshall, J.D., 2011. National satellite-based
land-use regression: NO2 in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology
45 (10), 4407–4414.
Olvera, H.A., Garcia, M., Li, W.W., Yang, H., Amaya, M.A., Myers, O., Burchiel, S.W.,
Berwick, M., Pingitore Jr, N.E., 2012. Principal component analysis optimization of a
PM2.5 land use regression model with small monitoring network. Science of the
Total Environment 425, 27–34.
Owusu, P.A., Sarkodie, S.A., 2020. Global estimation of mortality, disability-adjusted life
years and welfare cost from exposure to ambient air pollution. Science of the Total
Environment 742, 140636.
Oyjinda, P. and Pochai, N., 2017. Numerical simulation to air pollution emission control
near an industrial zone. Advances in Mathematical Physics, 2017.
Park, Y., Kwon, B., Heo, J., Hu, X., Liu, Y., Moon, T., 2020. Estimating PM2.5
concentration of the conterminous United States via interpretable convolutional
neural networks. Environmental Pollution 256, 113395.
Patton, A.P., Zamore, W., Naumova, E.N., Levy, J.I., Brugge, D., Durant, J.L., 2015.
Transferability and generalizability of regression models of ultrafine particles in
urban neighborhoods in the Boston area. Environmental Science & Technology 49
(10), 6051–6060.
Polat, E., Gunay, S., 2015. The comparison of partial least squares regression, principal
component regression and ridge regression with multiple linear regression for
predicting pm10 concentration level based on meteorological parameters. Journal of
Data Science 13 (4), 663–692.
Poplawski, K., Gould, T., Setton, E., Allen, R., Su, J., Larson, T., Henderson, S.,
Brauer, M., Hystad, P., Lightowlers, C., Keller, P., 2009. Intercity transferability of
land use regression models for estimating ambient concentrations of nitrogen
dioxide. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology 19 (1),
107–117.
PurpleAir, 2021. PurpleAir — Real Time Air Quality Monitoring. PurpleAir, Inc.
Qi, M., Hankey, S., 2021. Using street view imagery to predict street-level particulate air
pollution. Environmental Science & Technology 55 (4), 2695–2704.
Qi, M., Dixit, K., Marshall, J.D., Zhang, W., Hankey, S., 2022. National Land Use
Regression Model for NO2 Using Street View Imagery and Satellite Observations.
Environmental Science & Technology 56 (18), 13499–13509.
Rahman, M.M., Karunasinghe, J., Clifford, S., Knibbs, L.D., Morawska, L., 2020. New
insights into the spatial distribution of particle number concentrations by applying
non-parametric land use regression modelling. Science of the Total Environment
702, 134708.
Ren, X., Mi, Z., Georgopoulos, P.G., 2020. Comparison of Machine Learning and Land
Use Regression for fine scale spatiotemporal estimation of ambient air pollution:
Modeling ozone concentrations across the contiguous United States. Environment
International 142, 105827.
Renzi, M., Cerza, F., Gariazzo, C., Agabiti, N., Cascini, S., Di Domenicantonio, R.,
Davoli, M., Forastiere, F., Cesaroni, G., 2018. Air pollution and occurrence of type 2
diabetes in a large cohort study. Environment International 112, 68–76.
Reyes, J.M., Serre, M.L., 2014. An LUR/BME framework to estimate PM2.5 explained by
on road mobile and stationary sources. Environmental Science & Technology 48 (3),
1736–1744.
Robinson, D.P., Lloyd, C.D., McKinley, J.M., 2013. Increasing the accuracy of nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) pollution mapping using geographically weighted regression (GWR)
and geostatistics. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and
Geoinformation 21, 374–383.
Robinson, E.S., Shah, R.U., Messier, K., Gu, P., Li, H.Z., Apte, J.S., Robinson, A.L.,
Presto, A.A., 2019. Land-use regression modeling of source-resolved fine particulate
matter components from mobile sampling. Environmental Science & Technology 53
(15), 8925–8937.
Rose, N., Cowie, C., Gillett, R., Marks, G.B., 2011. Validation of a spatiotemporal land use
regression model incorporating fixed site monitors. Environmental Science &
Technology 45 (1), 294–299.
Roy, S.S., Pratyush, C., Barna, C., 2016. In: August. Predicting Ozone Layer
Concentration Using Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines, Random Forest and
Classification and Regression Tree. Springer, Cham, pp. 140–152.
Ryan, P.H., LeMasters, G.K., 2007. A review of land-use regression models for
characterizing intraurban air pollution exposure. Inhalation Toxicology 19 (sup1),
127–133.
Rybarczyk, Y., Zalakeviciute, R., 2018. Machine learning approaches for outdoor air
quality modelling: A systematic review. Applied Sciences 8 (12), 2570.
Saha, P.K., Li, H.Z., Apte, J.S., Robinson, A.L., Presto, A.A., 2019. Urban ultrafine particle
exposure assessment with land-use regression: influence of sampling strategy.
Environmental Science & Technology 53 (13), 7326–7336.
Sampson, P.D., Szpiro, A.A., Sheppard, L., Lindström, J., Kaufman, J.D., 2011. Pragmatic
estimation of a spatio-temporal air quality model with irregular monitoring data.
Atmospheric Environment 45 (36), 6593–6606.
X. Ma et al.
Sampson, P.D., Richards, M., Szpiro, A.A., Bergen, S., Sheppard, L., Larson, T.V.,
Kaufman, J.D., 2013. A regionalized national universal kriging model using Partial
Least Squares regression for estimating annual PM2.5 concentrations in
epidemiology. Atmospheric Environment 75, 383–392.
Shafran-Nathan, R., Etzion, Y., Broday, D.M., 2021. Fusion of land use regression
modeling output and wireless distributed sensor network measurements into a high
spatiotemporally-resolved NO2 product. Environmental Pollution 271, 116334.
Shahraiyni, H.T., Shahsavani, D., Sargazi, S., Habibi-Nokhandan, M., 2015. Evaluation of
MARS for the spatial distribution modeling of carbon monoxide in an urban area.
Atmospheric Pollution Research 6 (4), 581–588.
Shao, Y., Ma, Z., Wang, J., Bi, J., 2020. Estimating daily ground-level PM2.5 in China
with random-forest-based spatiotemporal kriging. Science of the Total Environment
740, 139761.
She, Q., Choi, M., Belle, J.H., Xiao, Q., Bi, J., Huang, K., Meng, X., Geng, G., Kim, J.,
He, K., Liu, M., 2020. Satellite-based estimation of hourly PM2.5 levels during heavy
winter pollution episodes in the Yangtze River Delta. China. Chemosphere 239,
124678.
Shen, L., Zhao, T., Wang, H., Liu, J., Bai, Y., Kong, S., Zheng, H., Zhu, Y., Shu, Z., 2021.
Importance of meteorology in air pollution events during the city lockdown for
COVID-19 in Hubei Province, Central China. Science of the Total Environment 754,
142227.
Shi, Y., Lau, K.K.L., Ng, E., 2016. Developing street-level PM2.5 and PM10 land use
regression models in high-density Hong Kong with urban morphological factors.
Environmental Science & Technology 50 (15), 8178–8187.
Shi, Y., Xie, X., Fung, J.C.H., Ng, E., 2018. Identifying critical building morphological
design factors of street-level air pollution dispersion in high-density built
environment using mobile monitoring. Building and Environment 128, 248–259.
Simon, M.C., Patton, A.P., Naumova, E.N., Levy, J.I., Kumar, P., Brugge, D., Durant, J.L.,
2018. Combining measurements from mobile monitoring and a reference site to
develop models of ambient ultrafine particle number concentration at residences.
Environmental Science & Technology 52 (12), 6985–6995.
Singh, K.P., Gupta, S., Kumar, A., Shukla, S.P., 2012. Linear and nonlinear modeling
approaches for urban air quality prediction. Science of the Total Environment 426,
244–255.
Smith, K.R., Edwards, P.M., Evans, M.J., Lee, J.D., Shaw, M.D., Squires, F., Wilde, S.,
Lewis, A.C., 2017. Clustering approaches to improve the performance of low cost air
pollution sensors. Faraday Discussions 200, 621–637.
Snyder, E.G., Watkins, T.H., Solomon, P.A., Thoma, E.D., Williams, R.W., Hagler, G.S.,
Shelow, D., Hindin, D.A., Kilaru, V.J., Preuss, P.W., 2013. The changing paradigm of
air pollution monitoring. Environmental Science & Technology 47 (20),
11369–11377.
Son, Y., Osornio-Vargas, Á.R., O’Neill, M.S., Hystad, P., Texcalac-Sangrador, J.L.,
Ohman-Strickland, P., Meng, Q., Schwander, S., 2018. Land use regression models to
assess air pollution exposure in Mexico City using finer spatial and temporal input
parameters. Science of the Total Environment 639, 40–48.
Song, W., Jia, H., Li, Z., Tang, D., Wang, C., 2019. Detecting urban land-use configuration
effects on NO2 and NO variations using geographically weighted land use regression.
Atmospheric Environment 197, 166–176.
Sorek-Hamer, M., Chatfield, R., Liu, Y., 2020. Strategies for using satellite-based products
in modeling PM2.5 and short-term pollution episodes. Environment International
144, 106057.
Stafoggia, M., Bellander, T., Bucci, S., Davoli, M., De Hoogh, K., De’Donato, F.,
Gariazzo, C., Lyapustin, A., Michelozzi, P., Renzi, M., Scortichini, M., 2019.
Estimation of daily PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations in Italy, 2013–2015, using a
spatiotemporal land-use random-forest model. Environment International 124,
170–179.
Stedman, J.R., Vincent, K.J., Campbell, G.W., Goodwin, J.W., Downing, C.E., 1997. New
high resolution maps of estimated background ambient NOx and NO2 concentrations
in the UK. Atmospheric Environment 31 (21), 3591–3602.
Strak, M., Janssen, N., Beelen, R., Schmitz, O., Vaartjes, I., Karssenberg, D., van den
Brink, C., Bots, M.L., Dijst, M., Brunekreef, B., Hoek, G., 2017. Long-term exposure to
particulate matter, NO2 and the oxidative potential of particulates and diabetes
prevalence in a large national health survey. Environment International 108,
228–236.
Su, X., An, J., Zhang, Y., Zhu, P., Zhu, B., 2020. Prediction of ozone hourly
concentrations by support vector machine and kernel extreme learning machine
using wavelet transformation and partial least squares methods. Atmospheric
Pollution Research 11 (6), 51–60.
Su, J.G., Brauer, M., Ainslie, B., Steyn, D., Larson, T., Buzzelli, M., 2008a. An innovative
land use regression model incorporating meteorology for exposure analysis. Science
of the Total Environment 390 (2–3), 520–529.
Su, J.G., Brauer, M., Buzzelli, M., 2008b. Estimating urban morphometry at the
neighborhood scale for improvement in modeling long-term average air pollution
concentrations. Atmospheric Environment 42 (34), 7884–7893.
Suleiman, A., Tight, M.R., Quinn, A.D., 2016. Hybrid neural networks and boosted
regression tree models for predicting roadside particulate matter. Environmental
Modeling & Assessment 21 (6), 731–750.
Sun, W., Zhang, H., Palazoglu, A., 2013. Prediction of 8 h-average ozone concentration
using a supervised hidden Markov model combined with generalized linear models.
Atmospheric Environment 81, 199–208.
Tella, A., Balogun, A.L., Adebisi, N., Abdullah, S., 2021. Spatial assessment of PM10
hotspots using Random Forest, K-Nearest Neighbour and Naïve Bayes. Atmospheric
Pollution Research 12 (10), 101202.
Tella, A., Balogun, A.L., 2021. GIS-based air quality modelling: spatial prediction of
PM10 for Selangor State, Malaysia using machine learning algorithms.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research 1–17.
20
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
Tripathy, S., Tunno, B.J., Michanowicz, D.R., Kinnee, E., Shmool, J.L., Gillooly, S.,
Clougherty, J.E., 2019. Hybrid land use regression modeling for estimating spatio-
temporal exposures to PM2.5, BC, and metal components across a metropolitan area
of complex terrain and industrial sources. Science of the Total Environment 673,
54–63.
Tularam, H., Ramsay, L.F., Muttoo, S., Brunekreef, B., Meliefste, K., de Hoogh, K.,
Naidoo, R.N., 2021. A hybrid air pollution/land use regression model for predicting
air pollution concentrations in Durban. South Africa. Environmental Pollution 274,
116513.
Van den Bossche, J., Theunis, J., Elen, B., Peters, J., Botteldooren, D., De Baets, B., 2016.
Opportunistic mobile air pollution monitoring: a case study with city wardens in
Antwerp. Atmospheric Environment 141, 408–421.
Van den Bossche, J., De Baets, B., Verwaeren, J., Botteldooren, D., Theunis, J., 2018.
Development and evaluation of land use regression models for black carbon based on
bicycle and pedestrian measurements in the urban environment. Environmental
Modelling & Software 99, 58–69.
Van den Bossche, J., De Baets, B., Botteldooren, D., Theunis, J., 2020. A spatio-temporal
land use regression model to assess street-level exposure to black carbon.
Environmental Modelling & Software 133, 104837.
Van den Hove, A., Verwaeren, J., Van den Bossche, J., Theunis, J., De Baets, B., 2020.
Development of a land use regression model for black carbon using mobile
monitoring data and its application to pollution-avoiding routing. Environmental
Research 183, 108619.
Van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R.V., Brauer, M., Boys, B.L., 2015. Use of satellite
observations for long-term exposure assessment of global concentrations of fine
particulate matter. Environmental Health Perspectives 123 (2), 135–143.
Van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R.V., Brauer, M., Hsu, N.C., Kahn, R.A., Levy, R.C.,
Lyapustin, A., Sayer, A.M., Winker, D.M., 2016. Global estimates of fine particulate
matter using a combined geophysical-statistical method with information from
satellites, models, and monitors. Environmental Science & Technology 50 (7),
3762–3772.
van Nunen, E., Vermeulen, R., Tsai, M.Y., Probst-Hensch, N., Ineichen, A., Davey, M.,
Imboden, M., Ducret-Stich, R., Naccarati, A., Raffaele, D., Ranzi, A., 2017. Land use
regression models for ultrafine particles in six European areas. Environmental
Science & Technology 51 (6), 3336–3345.
Van Roode, S., Ruiz-Aguilar, J.J., González-Enrique, J., Turias, I.J., 2019. An artificial
neural network ensemble approach to generate air pollution maps. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 191 (12), 1–15.
Verma, V., Fang, T., Xu, L., Peltier, R.E., Russell, A.G., Ng, N.L., Weber, R.J., 2015.
Organic aerosols associated with the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) by
water-soluble PM2.5. Environmental Science & Technology 49 (7), 4646–4656.
Vienneau, D., De Hoogh, K., Bechle, M.J., Beelen, R., Van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R.V.,
Millet, D.B., Hoek, G., Marshall, J.D., 2013. Western European land use regression
incorporating satellite-and ground-based measurements of NO2 and PM10.
Environmental Science & Technology 47 (23), 13555–13564.
Villa, T.F., Salimi, F., Morton, K., Morawska, L., Gonzalez, F., 2016. Development and
validation of a UAV based system for air pollution measurements. Sensors 16 (12),
2202.
Vizcaino, P., Lavalle, C., 2018. Development of European NO2 Land Use Regression
Model for present and future exposure assessment: Implications for policy analysis.
Environmental Pollution 240, 140–154.
Vu, B.N., Bi, J., Wang, W., Huff, A., Kondragunta, S., Liu, Y., 2022. Application of
geostationary satellite and high-resolution meteorology data in estimating hourly
PM2.5 levels during the Camp Fire episode in California. Remote Sensing of
Environment 271, 112890.
Wang, M., Beelen, R., Eeftens, M., Meliefste, K., Hoek, G., Brunekreef, B., 2012.
Systematic evaluation of land use regression models for NO2. Environmental Science
& Technology 46 (8), 4481–4489.
Wang, M., Beelen, R., Basagana, X., Becker, T., Cesaroni, G., De Hoogh, K., Dedele, A.,
Declercq, C., Dimakopoulou, K., Eeftens, M., Forastiere, F., 2013a. Evaluation of land
use regression models for NO2 and particulate matter in 20 European study areas: the
ESCAPE project. Environmental Science & Technology 47 (9), 4357–4364.
Wang, M., Beelen, R., Bellander, T., Birk, M., Cesaroni, G., Cirach, M., Cyrys, J., de
Hoogh, K., Declercq, C., Dimakopoulou, K., Eeftens, M., 2014. Performance of multi-
city land use regression models for nitrogen dioxide and fine particles.
Environmental Health Perspectives 122 (8), 843–849.
Wang, R., Henderson, S.B., Sbihi, H., Allen, R.W., Brauer, M., 2013b. Temporal stability
of land use regression models for traffic-related air pollution. Atmospheric
Environment 64, 312–319.
Wang, Y., Huang, L., Huang, C., Hu, J., Wang, M., 2023. High-resolution modeling for
criteria air pollutants and the associated air quality index in a metropolitan city.
Environment International 172, 107752.
Wang, M., Keller, J.P., Adar, S.D., Kim, S.Y., Larson, T.V., Olives, C., Sampson, P.D.,
Sheppard, L., Szpiro, A.A., Vedal, S., Kaufman, J.D., 2015. Development of long-term
spatiotemporal models for ambient ozone in six metropolitan regions of the United
States: the MESA Air study. Atmospheric Environment 123, 79–87.
Wang, W., Liu, X., Bi, J., Liu, Y., 2022. A machine learning model to estimate ground-
level ozone concentrations in California using TROPOMI data and high-resolution
meteorology. Environment International 158, 106917.
Wang, M., Sampson, P.D., Hu, J., Kleeman, M., Keller, J.P., Olives, C., Szpiro, A.A.,
Vedal, S., Kaufman, J.D., 2016. Combining land-use regression and chemical
transport modeling in a spatiotemporal geostatistical model for ozone and PM2.5.
Environmental Science & Technology 50 (10), 5111–5118.
Wang, D., Wang, Z., Peng, Z.R., Wang, D., 2020b. Using unmanned aerial vehicle to
investigate the vertical distribution of fine particulate matter. International Journal
of Environmental Science and Technology 17, 219–230.
X. Ma et al.
Wang, A., Xu, J., Tu, R., Saleh, M., Hatzopoulou, M., 2020a. Potential of machine
learning for prediction of traffic related air pollution. Transportation Research Part
d: Transport and Environment 88, 102599.
Wang, J., Xu, H., 2021. A novel hybrid spatiotemporal land use regression model system
at the megacity scale. Atmospheric Environment 244, 117971.
Wang, W., Zhao, S., Jiao, L., Taylor, M., Zhang, B., Xu, G., Hou, H., 2019. Estimation of
PM2.5 concentrations in China using a spatial back propagation neural network.
Scientific Reports 9 (1), 1–10.
Weissert, L.F., Alberti, K., Miskell, G., Pattinson, W., Salmond, J.A., Henshaw, G.,
Williams, D.E., 2019. Low-cost sensors and microscale land use regression: Data
fusion to resolve air quality variations with high spatial and temporal resolution.
Atmospheric Environment 213, 285–295.
Weissert, L., Alberti, K., Miles, E., Miskell, G., Feenstra, B., Henshaw, G.S.,
Papapostolou, V., Patel, H., Polidori, A., Salmond, J.A., Williams, D.E., 2020. Low-
cost sensor networks and land-use regression: Interpolating nitrogen dioxide
concentration at high temporal and spatial resolution in Southern California.
Atmospheric Environment 223, 117287.
Weissert, L.F., Salmond, J.A., Miskell, G., Alavi-Shoshtari, M., Williams, D.E., 2018.
Development of a microscale land use regression model for predicting NO2
concentrations at a heavy trafficked suburban area in Auckland, NZ. Science of the
Total Environment 619, 112–119.
Williams, D.E., 2019. Low cost sensor networks: how do we know the data are reliable?
ACS Sensors 4 (10), 2558–2565.
Wu, H., Reis, S., Lin, C., Heal, M.R., 2017. Effect of monitoring network design on land
use regression models for estimating residential NO2 concentration. Atmospheric
Environment 149, 24–33.
Wu, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, L., Song, G., Gao, J., Yu, L., 2020. Application of a taxi-based
mobile atmospheric monitoring system in Cangzhou, China. Transportation Research
Part d: Transport and Environment 86, 102449.
Wu, B., Yu, B., Shu, S., Liang, H., Zhao, Y., Wu, J., 2021. Mapping fine-scale visual
quality distribution inside urban streets using mobile LiDAR data. Building and
Environment 206, 108323.
Wu, C.D., Zeng, Y.T., Lung, S.C.C., 2018. A hybrid kriging/land-use regression model to
assess PM2.5 spatial-temporal variability. Science of the Total Environment 645,
1456–1464.
Xiang, Y., Zhang, T., Ma, C., Lv, L., Liu, J., Liu, W., Cheng, Y., 2021. Lidar vertical
observation network and data assimilation reveal key processes driving the 3-D
dynamic evolution of PM2.5 concentrations over the North China Plain. Atmospheric
Chemistry and Physics 21 (9), 7023–7037.
Xu, H., Bechle, M.J., Wang, M., Szpiro, A.A., Vedal, S., Bai, Y., Marshall, J.D., 2019a.
National PM2.5 and NO2 exposure models for China based on land use regression,
satellite measurements, and universal kriging. Science of the Total Environment 655,
423–433.
Xu, X., Qin, N., Qi, L., Zou, B., Cao, S., Zhang, K., Yang, Z., Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Duan, X.,
2021. Development of season-dependent land use regression models to estimate BC
and PM1 exposure. Science of the Total Environment, 148540.
Xu, X., Qin, N., Zhao, W., Tian, Q., Si, Q., Wu, W., Iskander, N., Yang, Z., Zhang, Y.,
Duan, X., 2022c. A three-dimensional LUR framework for PM2.5 exposure
assessment based on mobile unmanned aerial vehicle monitoring. Environmental
Pollution 301, 118997.
Xu, J., Yang, W., Han, B., Wang, M., Wang, Z., Zhao, Z., Bai, Z., Vedal, S., 2019b. An
advanced spatio-temporal model for particulate matter and gaseous pollutants in
Beijing, China. Atmospheric Environment 211, 120–127.
Xu, J., Yang, Z., Han, B., Yang, W., Duan, Y., Fu, Q., Bai, Z., 2022a. A unified empirical
modeling approach for particulate matter and NO2 in a coastal city in China.
Chemosphere, 134384.
Xu, J., Yang, W., Bai, Z., Zhang, R., Zheng, J., Wang, M., Zhu, T., 2022b. Modeling spatial
variation of gaseous air pollutants and particulate matters in a Metropolitan area
using mobile monitoring data. Environmental Research 210, 112858.
Xu, S., Zou, B., Lin, Y., Zhao, X., Li, S., Hu, C., 2019c. Strategies of method selection for
fine-scale PM2.5 mapping in an intra-urban area using crowdsourced monitoring.
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques 12 (5), 2933–2948.
Xuan, W., Zhang, F., Zhou, H., Du, Z., Liu, R., 2021. Improving geographically weighted
regression considering directional nonstationary for ground-Level PM2.5 estimation.
ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 10 (6), 413.
Yan, N., Mei, C.L., 2014. A two-step local smoothing approach for exploring spatio-
temporal patterns with application to the analysis of precipitation in the mainland of
China during 1986–2005. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 21, 373–390.
Yang, W., Deng, M., Xu, F., Wang, H., 2018. Prediction of hourly PM2.5 using a space-
time support vector regression model. Atmospheric Environment 181, 12–19.
Yang, Z., Freni-Sterrantino, A., Fuller, G.W., Gulliver, J., 2020. Development and
transferability of ultrafine particle land use regression models in London. Science of
the Total Environment 740, 140059.
21
Environment International 183 (2024) 108430
Yang, X., Zheng, Y., Geng, G., Liu, H., Man, H., Lv, Z., He, K., de Hoogh, K., 2017.
Development of PM2.5 and NO2 models in a LUR framework incorporating satellite
remote sensing and air quality model data in Pearl River Delta region. China.
Environmental Pollution 226, 143–153.
Yeganeh, B., Motlagh, M.S.P., Rashidi, Y., Kamalan, H., 2012. Prediction of CO
concentrations based on a hybrid Partial Least Square and Support Vector Machine
model. Atmospheric Environment 55, 357–365.
Yeganeh, B., Hewson, M.G., Clifford, S., Tavassoli, A., Knibbs, L.D., Morawska, L., 2018.
Estimating the spatiotemporal variation of NO2 concentration using an adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system. Environmental Modelling & Software 100, 222–235.
Yin, X., Franklin, M., Fallah-Shorshani, M., Shafer, M., McConnell, R., Fruin, S., 2022.
Exposure models for particulate matter elemental concentrations in Southern
California. Environment International 165, 107247.
Yuan, Z., Kerckhoffs, J., Hoek, G., Vermeulen, R., 2022. A knowledge transfer approach
to map long-term concentrations of hyperlocal air pollution from short-term mobile
measurements. Environmental Science & Technology 56 (19), 13820–13828.
Yuchi, W., Gombojav, E., Boldbaatar, B., Galsuren, J., Enkhmaa, S., Beejin, B.,
Naidan, G., Ochir, C., Legtseg, B., Byambaa, T., Barn, P., 2019. Evaluation of random
forest regression and multiple linear regression for predicting indoor fine particulate
matter concentrations in a highly polluted city. Environmental Pollution 245,
746–753.
Zalzal, J., Alameddine, I., El Khoury, C., Minet, L., Shekarrizfard, M., Weichenthal, S.,
Hatzopoulou, M., 2019. Assessing the transferability of landuse regression models
for ultrafine particles across two Canadian cities. Science of the Total Environment
662, 722–734.
Zhai, L., Li, S., Zou, B., Sang, H., Fang, X., Xu, S., 2018. An improved geographically
weighted regression model for PM2.5 concentration estimation in large areas.
Atmospheric Environment 181, 145–154.
Zhan, Y., Luo, Y., Deng, X., Grieneisen, M.L., Zhang, M., Di, B., 2018. Spatiotemporal
prediction of daily ambient ozone levels across China using random forest for human
exposure assessment. Environmental Pollution 233, 464–473.
Zhang, P., Ma, W., Wen, F., Liu, L., Yang, L., Song, J., Wang, N., Liu, Q., 2021b.
Estimating PM2.5 concentration using the machine learning GA-SVM method to
improve the land use regression model in Shaanxi, China. Ecotoxicology and
Environmental Safety 225, 112772.
Zhang, L., Tian, X., Zhao, Y., Liu, L., Li, Z., Tao, L., Wang, X., Guo, X., Luo, Y., 2021a.
Application of nonlinear land use regression models for ambient air pollutants and
air quality index. Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (10), 101186.
Zhang, Z., Wang, J., Hart, J.E., Laden, F., Zhao, C., Li, T., Zheng, P., Li, D., Ye, Z.,
Chen, K., 2018. National scale spatiotemporal land-use regression model for PM2.5,
PM10 and NO2 concentration in China. Atmospheric Environment 192, 48–54.
Zhang, Q., Wu, S., Wang, X., Sun, B., Liu, H., 2020. A PM2.5 concentration prediction
model based on multi-task deep learning for intensive air quality monitoring
stations. Journal of Cleaner Production 275, 122722.
Zhao, B., Yu, L., Wang, C., Shuai, C., Zhu, J., Qu, S., Taiebat, M., Xu, M., 2021. Urban Air
Pollution Mapping Using Fleet Vehicles as Mobile Monitors and Machine Learning.
Environmental Science & Technology 55 (8), 5579–5588.
Zhou, S., Lin, R., 2019. Spatial-temporal heterogeneity of air pollution: The relationship
between built environment and on-road PM2.5 at micro scale. Transportation
Research Part d: Transport and Environment 76, 305–322.
Zhou, X., Tong, W., Li, L., 2020. Deep learning spatiotemporal air pollution data in China
using data fusion. Earth Science Informatics 13 (3), 859–868.
Zou, B., Luo, Y., Wan, N., Zheng, Z., Sternberg, T., Liao, Y., 2015a. Performance
comparison of LUR and OK in PM2.5 concentration mapping: a multidimensional
perspective. Scientific Reports 5 (1), 1–7.
Zou, B., Wang, M., Wan, N., Wilson, J.G., Fang, X., Tang, Y., 2015b. Spatial modeling of
PM2.5 concentrations with a multifactoral radial basis function neural network.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22 (14), 10395–10404.
Zou, B., Chen, J., Zhai, L., Fang, X., Zheng, Z., 2016. Satellite based mapping of ground
PM2.5 concentration using generalized additive modeling. Remote Sensing 9 (1), 1.
Zou, B., Li, S., Lin, Y., Wang, B., Cao, S., Zhao, X., Peng, F., Qin, N., Guo, Q., Feng, H.,
Matthew, C.J., 2020. Efforts in reducing air pollution exposure risk in China: State
versus individuals. Environment International 137, 105504.
Further reading
Lee, E.G., Magrm, R., Kusti, M., Kashon, M.L., Guffey, S., Costas, M.M., Boykin, C.J.,
Harper, M., 2017. Comparison between active (pumped) and passive (diffusive)
sampling methods for formaldehyde in pathology and histology laboratories. Journal
of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 14 (1), 31–39.