52 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Distributed Multi-Scale Calibration of Low-Cost Ozone Sensors in Wireless Sensor Networks J. Barcelo-Ordinas et al. 10.3390/s19112503
2. Improving data reliability: A quality control practice for low-cost PM2.5 sensor network X. Qiao et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146381
3. Unravelling a black box: an open-source methodology for the field calibration of small air quality sensors S. Schmitz et al. 10.5194/amt-14-7221-2021
4. Examining spatiotemporal variability of urban particulate matter and application of high-time resolution data from a network of low-cost air pollution sensors S. Feinberg et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.06.026
5. Improving Data Quality of Low-cost IoT Sensors in Environmental Monitoring Networks Using Data Fusion and Machine Learning Approach N. Okafor et al. 10.1016/j.icte.2020.06.004
6. Distant calibration of low-cost PM and NO2 sensors; evidence from multiple sensor testbeds J. Hofman et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2021.101246
7. Performance evaluation of ozone and particulate matter sensors H. DeWitt et al. 10.1080/10962247.2020.1713921
8. A Statistical Calibration Framework for Improving Non-Reference Method Particulate Matter Reporting: A Focus on Community Air Monitoring Settings S. Commodore et al. 10.3390/atmos11080807
9. Demonstration of a Low-Cost Multi-Pollutant Network to Quantify Intra-Urban Spatial Variations in Air Pollutant Source Impacts and to Evaluate Environmental Justice R. Tanzer et al. 10.3390/ijerph16142523
10. Smart Citizen Kit and Station: An open environmental monitoring system for citizen participation and scientific experimentation G. Camprodon et al. 10.1016/j.ohx.2019.e00070
11. Performance of NO, NO<sub>2</sub> low cost sensors and three calibration approaches within a real world application A. Bigi et al. 10.5194/amt-11-3717-2018
12. On the robustness of field calibration for smart air quality monitors S. De Vito et al. 10.1016/j.snb.2020.127869
13. Mapping pollution exposure and chemistry during an extreme air quality event (the 2018 Kīlauea eruption) using a low-cost sensor network B. Crawford et al. 10.1073/pnas.2025540118
14. The BErkeley Atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> Observation Network: field calibration and evaluation of low-cost air quality sensors J. Kim et al. 10.5194/amt-11-1937-2018
15. Long-term evaluation of air sensor technology under ambient conditions in Denver, Colorado S. Feinberg et al. 10.5194/amt-11-4605-2018
16. Application of Gaussian Mixture Regression for the Correction of Low Cost PM2.5 Monitoring Data in Accra, Ghana C. McFarlane et al. 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.1c00217
17. Air pollution monitoring network using low-cost sensors, a case study in Hanoi, Vietnam T. Nguyen et al. 10.1088/1755-1315/266/1/012017
18. Calibration and assessment of electrochemical low-cost sensors in remote alpine harsh environments F. Dallo et al. 10.5194/amt-14-6005-2021
19. Performance evaluation of light weight gas sensor system suitable for airborne applications against co-location gas analysers over Delhi A. Ahlawat et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134016
20. Graph Learning Techniques Using Structured Data for IoT Air Pollution Monitoring Platforms P. Ferrer-Cid et al. 10.1109/JIOT.2021.3067717
21. Outlier detection and gap filling methodologies for low-cost air quality measurements T. Ottosen & P. Kumar 10.1039/C8EM00593A
22. Field and laboratory performance evaluations of 28 gas-phase air quality sensors by the AQ-SPEC program A. Collier-Oxandale et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.117092
23. Calibrations of Low-Cost Air Pollution Monitoring Sensors for CO, NO2, O3, and SO2 P. Han et al. 10.3390/s21010256
24. An improved low-power measurement of ambient NO<sub>2</sub> and O<sub>3</sub> combining electrochemical sensor clusters and machine learning K. Smith et al. 10.5194/amt-12-1325-2019
25. Deployment, Calibration, and Cross-Validation of Low-Cost Electrochemical Sensors for Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Ozone for an Epidemiological Study C. Zuidema et al. 10.3390/s21124214
26. Plume analysis from field evaluations of a portable air quality monitoring system J. Marto et al. 10.1080/10962247.2020.1834010
27. Effect of Relative Humidity and Air Temperature on the Results Obtained from Low-Cost Gas Sensors for Ambient Air Quality Measurements A. Samad et al. 10.3390/s20185175
28. Machine learning calibration of low-cost NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>10</sub> sensors: non-linear algorithms and their impact on site transferability P. Nowack et al. 10.5194/amt-14-5637-2021
29. The Merits of a Decentralized Pollution-Monitoring System Based on Distributed Ledger Technology M. Lucking et al. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3028430
30. The evaluation and optimization of calibration methods for low-cost particulate matter sensors: Inter-comparison between fixed and mobile methods X. Qin et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136791
31. Evaluating and improving the reliability of gas-phase sensor system calibrations across new locations for ambient measurements and personal exposure monitoring S. Vikram et al. 10.5194/amt-12-4211-2019
32. Measurements of PM<sub>2.5</sub> with PurpleAir under atmospheric conditions K. Ardon-Dryer et al. 10.5194/amt-13-5441-2020
33. Air Quality in Puerto Rico in the Aftermath of Hurricane Maria: A Case Study on the Use of Lower Cost Air Quality Monitors R. Subramanian et al. 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.8b00079
34. A proposed population-health based metric for evaluating representativeness of air quality monitoring in cities: Using Hong Kong as a demonstration T. Hohenberger et al. 10.1371/journal.pone.0252290
35. Design and testing of a low-cost sensor and sampling platform for indoor air quality J. Tryner et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108398
36. Distributed colorimetric interferometer for mapping the pressure distribution in a complex microfluidics network X. Zhu et al. 10.1039/D0LC00960A
37. Stationary and portable multipollutant monitors for high-spatiotemporal-resolution air quality studies including online calibration C. Buehler et al. 10.5194/amt-14-995-2021
38. Field comparison of electrochemical gas sensor data correction algorithms for ambient air measurements Y. Liang et al. 10.1016/j.snb.2020.128897
39. Multisensor Data Fusion Calibration in IoT Air Pollution Platforms P. Ferrer-Cid et al. 10.1109/JIOT.2020.2965283
40. Low-cost sensors as an alternative for long-term air quality monitoring X. Liu et al. 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109438
41. Impact of Multi-Sensor Technology for Enhancing Global Security in Closed Environments Using Cloud-Based Resources S. Altowaijri et al. 10.3390/jsan8010004
42. Inferring Aerosol Sources from Low-Cost Air Quality Sensor Measurements: A Case Study in Delhi, India D. Hagan et al. 10.1021/acs.estlett.9b00393
43. Poisoning effects of sulfur dioxide in an air stream on spatial proton exchange membrane fuel cell performance T. Reshetenko et al. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.226949
44. A Survey on Sensor Calibration in Air Pollution Monitoring Deployments B. Maag et al. 10.1109/JIOT.2018.2853660
45. Augmenting the Standard Operating Procedures of Health and Air Quality Stakeholders With NASA Resources B. Duncan et al. 10.1029/2021GH000451
46. Impacts of Modifiable Factors on Ambient Air Pollution: A Case Study of COVID-19 Shutdowns R. Tanzer-Gruener et al. 10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00365
47. Low Cost Sensor With IoT LoRaWAN Connectivity and Machine Learning-Based Calibration for Air Pollution Monitoring S. Ali et al. 10.1109/TIM.2020.3034109
48. Development of a general calibration model and long-term performance evaluation of low-cost sensors for air pollutant gas monitoring C. Malings et al. 10.5194/amt-12-903-2019
49. In search of an optimal in-field calibration method of low-cost gas sensors for ambient air pollutants: Comparison of linear, multilinear and artificial neural network approaches D. Topalović et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.06.028
50. A Smart Rig for Calibration of Gas Sensor Nodes M. Benammar et al. 10.3390/s20082341
51. Use of electrochemical sensors for measurement of air pollution: correcting interference response and validating measurements E. Cross et al. 10.5194/amt-10-3575-2017
52. A machine learning calibration model using random forests to improve sensor performance for lower-cost air quality monitoring N. Zimmerman et al. 10.5194/amt-11-291-2018