226 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Examining the functional range of commercially available low‐cost airborne particle sensors and consequences for monitoring of indoor air quality in residences Y. Zou et al. 10.1111/ina.12621
2. Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network E. Considine et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115833
3. Low-Cost Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring - the Current State of the Technology and a Use Overview P. Buček et al. 10.2478/cdem-2021-0003
4. Using a low-cost monitor to assess the impact of leaf blowers on particle pollution during street cleaning I. Costa-Gómez et al. 10.1007/s11869-019-00768-8
5. Phase-wise analysis of the COVID-19 lockdown impact on aerosol, radiation and trace gases and associated chemistry in a tropical rural environment C. Jain et al. 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110665
6. Significance of Meteorological Feature Selection and Seasonal Variation on Performance and Calibration of a Low-Cost Particle Sensor V. Kumar et al. 10.3390/atmos13040587
7. A temporally-calibrated method for crowdsourcing based mapping of intra-urban PM2.5 concentrations Z. Zheng et al. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122347
8. Gaussian process regression model for dynamically calibrating and surveilling a wireless low-cost particulate matter sensor network in Delhi T. Zheng et al. 10.5194/amt-12-5161-2019
9. In-car and Near-road Exposure to PM2.5 and BC C. Ma & G. Kang 10.5572/ajae.2020.14.2.146
10. Concurrent assessment of personal, indoor, and outdoor PM 2.5 and PM 1 levels and source contributions using novel low‐cost sensing devices S. Lung et al. 10.1111/ina.12763
11. Characterisation and calibration of low-cost PM sensors at high temporal resolution to reference-grade performance F. Bulot et al. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15943
12. Response of eight low-cost particle sensors and consumer devices to typical indoor emission events in a real home (ASHRAE 1756-RP) Y. Zou et al. 10.1080/23744731.2019.1676094
13. Innovative Air-Preconditioning Method for Accurate Particulate Matter Sensing in Humid Environments Z. Kunić et al. 10.3390/s24175477
14. Intra–Community Scale Variability of Air Quality in the Center of a Megacity in South Korea: A High-Density Cost-Effective Sensor Network Y. Park et al. 10.3390/app11199105
15. Association Between Bedroom Particulate Matter Filtration and Changes in Airway Pathophysiology in Children With Asthma X. Cui et al. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0140
16. Sensors and Analytical Technologies for Air Quality: Particulate Matters and Bioaerosols X. Su et al. 10.1002/asia.202001051
17. Validation of Low-Cost Sensors in Measuring Real-Time PM10 Concentrations at Two Sites in Delhi National Capital Region R. Sahu et al. 10.3390/s20051347
18. Oral cavity response to air pollutant exposure and association with pulmonary inflammation and symptoms in asthmatic children L. He et al. 10.1016/j.envres.2021.112275
19. Low-cost sensors for measuring airborne particulate matter: Field evaluation and calibration at a South-Eastern European site G. Kosmopoulos et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141396
20. Incorporating Low-Cost Sensor Measurements into High-Resolution PM2.5 Modeling at a Large Spatial Scale J. Bi et al. 10.1021/acs.est.9b06046
21. Identifying Patterns and Sources of Fine and Ultrafine Particulate Matter in London Using Mobile Measurements of Lung-Deposited Surface Area R. Shah et al. 10.1021/acs.est.2c08096
22. Development and evaluation of correction models for a low-cost fine particulate matter monitor B. Nilson et al. 10.5194/amt-15-3315-2022
23. Efficient calibration of cost-efficient particulate matter sensors using machine learning and time-series alignment S. Koziel et al. 10.1016/j.knosys.2024.111879
24. Low-Cost Air Quality Sensors: One-Year Field Comparative Measurement of Different Gas Sensors and Particle Counters with Reference Monitors at Tušimice Observatory P. Bauerová et al. 10.3390/atmos11050492
25. Field performance of a low-cost sensor in the monitoring of particulate matter in Santiago, Chile M. Tagle et al. 10.1007/s10661-020-8118-4
26. Response of low-cost sensors to high PM 2.5 concentrations during bushfire and haze events X. Liu et al. 10.1080/02786826.2024.2368733
27. Insights about the Sources of PM2.5 in an Urban Area from Measurements of a Low-Cost Sensor Network G. Kosmopoulos et al. 10.3390/atmos13030440
28. The dependence of PurpleAir sensors on particle size distribution and meteorology and their relationship to integrating nephelometers W. Malm et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2024.120757
29. From low-cost sensors to high-quality data: A summary of challenges and best practices for effectively calibrating low-cost particulate matter mass sensors M. Giordano et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105833
30. Particle number size distribution evaluation of Plantower PMS5003 low-cost PM sensors – a field experiment A. Caseiro et al. 10.1039/D4EA00086B
31. Influence of seasonal variation on spatial distribution of PM2.5 concentration using low-cost sensors S. Chaudhry et al. 10.1007/s10661-024-13377-5
32. Fine particle mass monitoring with low-cost sensors: Corrections and long-term performance evaluation C. Malings et al. 10.1080/02786826.2019.1623863
33. Field Evaluation of Low-Cost PM Sensors (Purple Air PA-II) Under Variable Urban Air Quality Conditions, in Greece I. Stavroulas et al. 10.3390/atmos11090926
34. Low-Cost Sensor Node for Air Quality Monitoring: Field Tests and Validation of Particulate Matter Measurements U. Schilt et al. 10.3390/s23020794
35. A low-cost monitor for simultaneous measurement of fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth – Part 3: Automation and design improvements E. Wendt et al. 10.5194/amt-14-6023-2021
36. Field Calibration and Evaluation of an Internet-of-Things-Based Particulate Matter Sensor N. Cowell et al. 10.3389/fenvs.2021.798485
37. Development of Particle Condensation System (PCS) Sampler for Semi-continuous Measurements of Water Soluble Aerosol Chemical Composition J. Ban et al. 10.5572/KOSAE.2019.35.6.802
38. Evaluation of two collocated federal equivalent method PM2.5 instruments over a wide range of concentrations in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina G. Hagler et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2022.101374
39. Laboratory evaluation of particle-size selectivity of optical low-cost particulate matter sensors J. Kuula et al. 10.5194/amt-13-2413-2020
40. The Relocation Problem of Field Calibrated Low-Cost Sensor Systems in Air Quality Monitoring: A Sampling Bias G. Tancev & C. Pascale 10.3390/s20216198
41. 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
42. Long-Term Evaluation and Calibration of Low-Cost Particulate Matter (PM) Sensor H. Lee et al. 10.3390/s20133617
43. Academically Produced Air Pollution Sensors for Personal Exposure Assessment: The Canarin Project B. Dessimond et al. 10.3390/s21051876
44. Evaluating the PurpleAir monitor as an aerosol light scattering instrument J. Ouimette et al. 10.5194/amt-15-655-2022
45. Nonlinear Regression Approach as a Correction Factor of Measurements of Low-Cost Electrochemical Air Quality Sensors I. Christakis et al. 10.3390/app14083282
46. Field calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors using artificial neural networks and affine response correction S. Koziel et al. 10.1016/j.measurement.2024.114529
47. Monitoring Excess Exposure to Air Pollution for Professional Drivers in London Using Low-Cost Sensors L. Frederickson et al. 10.3390/atmos11070749
48. A systematic investigation on the effects of temperature and relative humidity on the performance of eight low-cost particle sensors and devices Y. Zou et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2020.105715
49. Improved PM2.5 concentration estimates from low-cost sensors using calibration models categorized by relative humidity J. Hua et al. 10.1080/02786826.2021.1873911
50. Intra- and inter-city variability of PM2.5 concentrations in Greece as determined with a low-cost sensor network K. Dimitriou et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119713
51. Low-cost monitoring of atmospheric PM—development and testing C. Báthory et al. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114158
52. Calibrating low-cost sensors for ambient air monitoring: Techniques, trends, and challenges L. Liang 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111163
53. Environmental Particulate Matter (PM) Exposure Assessment of Construction Activities Using Low-Cost PM Sensor and Latin Hypercubic Technique M. Khan et al. 10.3390/su13147797
54. Exploration of intra-city and inter-city PM2.5 regional calibration models to improve low-cost sensor performance S. Jain & N. Zimmerman 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2024.106335
55. Calibration of PurpleAir low-cost particulate matter sensors: model development for air quality under high relative humidity conditions M. Mathieu-Campbell et al. 10.5194/amt-17-6735-2024
56. Low Cost Sensor Networks: How Do We Know the Data Are Reliable? D. Williams 10.1021/acssensors.9b01455
57. Observationally constrained mass balance box model analysis of aerosol mitigation potential using fan powered filters S. Wang et al. 10.1088/2515-7620/ad1422
58. Application of low-cost particulate matter sensors for air quality monitoring and exposure assessment in underground mines: A review N. Amoah et al. 10.1007/s12613-021-2378-z
59. Extended fumigation effect on surface and boundary layer aerosol concentrations observed during solar eclipse M. Ratnam et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2020.10.003
60. Bioaerosol sampling optimization for community exposure assessment in cities with poor sanitation: A one health cross-sectional study L. Rocha-Melogno et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139495
61. Wildfire smoke impacts on indoor air quality assessed using crowdsourced data in California Y. Liang et al. 10.1073/pnas.2106478118
62. Malondialdehyde in Nasal Fluid: A Biomarker for Monitoring Asthma Control in Relation to Air Pollution Exposure L. He et al. 10.1021/acs.est.0c02558
63. Evaluation of the Performance of Low-Cost Air Quality Sensors at a High Mountain Station with Complex Meteorological Conditions H. Li et al. 10.3390/atmos11020212
64. Ambient characterisation of PurpleAir particulate matter monitors for measurements to be considered as indicative A. Caseiro et al. 10.1039/D2EA00085G
65. Evaluation and calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors for respirable coal mine dust monitoring Z. Feng et al. 10.1080/02786826.2023.2288609
66. Assessment of PM2.5 Concentration at University Transit Bus Stops Using Low-Cost Aerosol Monitors by Student Commuters W. Murray et al. 10.3390/s24144520
67. Performance of a Low-Cost Sensor Community Air Monitoring Network in Imperial County, CA P. English et al. 10.3390/s20113031
68. Assessing the accuracy of low-cost optical particle sensors using a physics-based approach D. Hagan & J. Kroll 10.5194/amt-13-6343-2020
69. Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway H. Liu et al. 10.3390/atmos10020041
70. Strategies of method selection for fine-scale PM<sub>2.5</sub> mapping in an intra-urban area using crowdsourced monitoring S. Xu et al. 10.5194/amt-12-2933-2019
71. Assessment of a clean cooking fuel distribution scheme in rural households of India – “Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY)” V. Sahu et al. 10.1016/j.esd.2024.101492
72. Low-cost solar PV soiling sensor validation and size resolved soiling impacts: A comprehensive field study in Western India M. Valerino et al. 10.1016/j.solener.2020.03.118
73. Predicting Photovoltaic Soiling From Air Quality Measurements S. Toth et al. 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2020.2983990
74. Band-Sensitive Calibration of Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensors by LSTM Model with Dynamically Weighted Loss Function J. Ryu & H. Park 10.3390/su14106120
75. Field Calibration of Low-Cost Mos Voc Sensors and Application for Source Characterization G. Hong et al. 10.2139/ssrn.4198986
76. Air Quality Sensor Experts Convene: Current Quality Assurance Considerations for Credible Data K. Barkjohn et al. 10.1021/acsestair.4c00125
77. Intercomparison of PurpleAir Sensor Performance over Three Years Indoors and Outdoors at a Home: Bias, Precision, and Limit of Detection Using an Improved Algorithm for Calculating PM2.5 L. Wallace 10.3390/s22072755
78. Design, fabrication, and calibration of the Building EnVironment and Occupancy (BEVO) Beacon: A rapidly-deployable and affordable indoor environmental quality monitor H. Fritz et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109432
79. Development and application of a United States-wide correction for PM<sub>2.5</sub> data collected with the PurpleAir sensor K. Barkjohn et al. 10.5194/amt-14-4617-2021
80. Investigating the Sensitivity of Low-Cost Sensors in Measuring Particle Number Concentrations across Diverse Atmospheric Conditions in Greece and Spain G. Kosmopoulos et al. 10.3390/s23146541
81. Unexpected Performance Improvements of Nitrogen Dioxide and Ozone Sensors by Including Carbon Monoxide Sensor Signal M. Hasan et al. 10.1021/acsomega.2c07734
82. SENSORES DE MATERIAL PARTICULADO EN SUSPENSIÓN DE BAJO COSTO: INTEGRACIÓN AL MONITOREO DE LA CALIDAD DEL AIRE D. Gomez & J. Vassallo 10.22201/iingen.0718378xe.2023.16.3.86568
83. Long-term field calibration of low-cost metal oxide VOC sensor: Meteorological and interference gas effects G. Hong et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119955
84. Assessing Inequitable Urban Heat Islands and Air Pollution Disparities with Low-Cost Sensors in Richmond, Virginia A. Eanes et al. 10.3390/su122310089
85. Seasonally optimized calibrations improve low-cost sensor performance: long-term field evaluation of PurpleAir sensors in urban and rural India M. Campmier et al. 10.5194/amt-16-4357-2023
86. AirMLP: A Multilayer Perceptron Neural Network for Temporal Correction of PM2.5 Values in Turin M. Casari et al. 10.3390/s23239446
87. Calibrating low-cost sensors using MERRA-2 reconstructed PM2.5 mass concentration as a proxy V. Malyan et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2023.102027
88. 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
89. Dust Under the Radar: Rethinking How to Evaluate the Impacts of Dust Events on Air Quality in the United States K. Ardon‐Dryer et al. 10.1029/2023GH000953
90. The effects of ventilation and filtration on indoor PM2.5 in office buildings in four countries E. Jones et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107975
91. Associations of personal exposure to air pollutants with airway mechanics in children with asthma L. He et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105647
92. Fusion of Environmental Sensing on PM2.5 and Deep Learning on Vehicle Detecting for Acquiring Roadside PM2.5 Concentration Increments W. Wang et al. 10.3390/s20174679
93. Laboratory Evaluations of Correction Equations with Multiple Choices for Seed Low-Cost Particle Sensing Devices in Sensor Networks W. Wang et al. 10.3390/s20133661
94. Improvement of Surface PM2.5 Diurnal Variation Simulations in East Africa for the MAIA Satellite Mission C. Li et al. 10.1021/acsestair.3c00008
95. Personal Exposure to PM2.5 Oxidative Potential in Association with Pulmonary Pathophysiologic Outcomes in Children with Asthma L. He et al. 10.1021/acs.est.0c06114
96. Application of the low-cost sensing technology for indoor air quality monitoring: A review J. Sá et al. 10.1016/j.eti.2022.102551
97. A Review of Literature on the Usage of Low-Cost Sensors to Measure Particulate Matter A. Raysoni et al. 10.3390/earth4010009
98. Evaluation of PM2.5 spatio-temporal variability and hotspot formation using low-cost sensors across urban-rural landscape in lucknow, India S. Madhwal et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.120302
99. Review of the Performance of Low-Cost Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring F. Karagulian et al. 10.3390/atmos10090506
100. Evaluation of calibration performance of a low-cost particulate matter sensor using collocated and distant NO2 K. Ko et al. 10.5194/amt-17-3303-2024
101. Ultra-Light Airborne Measurement System for Investigation of Urban Boundary Layer Dynamics P. Sekula et al. 10.3390/s21092920
102. Variations of PM2.5-bound elements and their associated effects during long-distance transport of dust storms: Insights from multi-sites observations Q. Meng et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164062
103. Detection and identification of shape, size, and concentration of particulate matter in ambient air using bright field microscopy-based system A. Kumar et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2023.101913
104. Traceable PM2.5 and PM10 Calibration of Low-Cost Sensors with Ambient-like Aerosols Generated in the Laboratory S. Horender et al. 10.3390/app11199014
105. Comparison of PM10 emission flux of two fugitive area sources based on the real-time flux monitoring results S. Kim et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168666
106. Measurement of Air Pollution Parameters in Montenegro Using the Ecomar System N. Zaric et al. 10.3390/ijerph18126565
107. SenDaL: An Effective and Efficient Calibration Framework of Low-Cost Sensors for Daily Life S. Ahn et al. 10.1109/JIOT.2024.3371150
108. Aerosol Measurement Degradation in Low-Cost Particle Sensors Using Laboratory Calibration and Field Validation A. Peck et al. 10.3390/toxics11010056
109. Summary of PM2.5 measurement artifacts associated with the Teledyne T640 PM Mass Monitor under controlled chamber experimental conditions using polydisperse ammonium sulfate aerosols and biomass smoke R. Long et al. 10.1080/10962247.2023.2171156
110. Calibration Methods for Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors Considering Seasonal Variability J. Kang & K. Choi 10.3390/s24103023
111. Calibration of PurpleAir PA-I and PA-II Monitors Using Daily Mean PM2.5 Concentrations Measured in California, Washington, and Oregon from 2017 to 2021 L. Wallace et al. 10.3390/s22134741
112. The Kansas City Transportation and Local-Scale Air Quality Study (KC-TRAQS): Integration of Low-Cost Sensors and Reference Grade Monitoring in a Complex Metropolitan Area. Part 1: Overview of the Project S. Kimbrough et al. 10.3390/chemosensors7020026
113. Air quality during and after the Commonwealth Games 2018 in Australia: Multiple benefits of monitoring T. Kuhn et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2020.105707
114. Creating Clean Air Spaces During Wildland Fire Smoke Episodes: Web Summit Summary G. Davison et al. 10.3389/fpubh.2021.508971
115. Plugging the ambient air monitoring gaps in India's national clean air programme (NCAP) airsheds S. Guttikunda et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119712
116. The U.S. EPA wildland fire sensor challenge: Performance and evaluation of solver submitted multi-pollutant sensor systems M. Landis et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.118165
117. Correction and Accuracy of PurpleAir PM2.5 Measurements for Extreme Wildfire Smoke K. Barkjohn et al. 10.3390/s22249669
118. Long-term evaluation and calibration of three types of low-cost PM2.5 sensors at different air quality monitoring stations G. Hong et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105829
119. Field calibration protocol for optical-based air quality sensors in Indian conditions S. Dhawan et al. 10.1016/j.matpr.2024.03.020
120. Insights into low-cost pm sensors using size-resolved scattering intensity of cooking aerosols in a test house A. Thakur et al. 10.1080/02786826.2024.2342722
121. Evaluation of Low-Cost Sensors for Ambient PM2.5 Monitoring M. Badura et al. 10.1155/2018/5096540
122. Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors in Beijing H. Mei et al. 10.3390/s20164381
123. Estimating individual vehicle emission factors from near-road measurements in India N. Raparthi et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119869
124. Assessment of Indoor Particulate Matter and Teacher’s Perceived Indoor Climate in Government Schools of Bilaspur District, Chhattisgarh, India: A Cross-Sectional Study S. Pritwani & N. Devasenapathy 10.4103/ijoem.ijoem_104_23
125. Improving PM10 sensor accuracy in urban areas through calibration in Timișoara R. Blaga & S. Gautam 10.1038/s41612-024-00812-0
126. Assessing the spatial transferability of calibration models across a low-cost sensors network V. Malyan et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2024.106437
127. Concept Development and Field Testing of Wireless Outdoor Indicator System for Use in Monitoring Exposures at Work among Malaysian Traffic Police P. Mohamad Jamil et al. 10.3390/toxics11040385
128. Investigation of indoor air quality in university residences using low-cost sensors R. Afroz et al. 10.1039/D2EA00149G
129. Evaluation and calibration of a low-cost particle sensor in ambient conditions using machine-learning methods M. Si et al. 10.5194/amt-13-1693-2020
130. Quantitative Analysis for Application Specific Calibration Approaches for Low-Cost Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring M. Narayana et al. 10.1541/ieejeiss.142.1166
131. Evaluation of a new low-cost particle sensor as an internet-of-things device for outdoor air quality monitoring F. Roberts et al. 10.1080/10962247.2022.2093293
132. Use of low-cost PM monitors and a multi-wavelength aethalometer to characterize PM2.5 in the Yakama Nation reservation O. Stampfer et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117292
133. Measurement and Monitoring of Particulate Matter in Construction Sites: Guidelines for Gravimetric Approach I. Araújo & D. Costa 10.3390/su14010558
134. Estimation of aerosol liquid water from optical scattering instruments using ambient and dried sample streams J. Zhang et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117787
135. Assessment and Improvement of Two Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor Systems by Using Spatial Interpolation Data from Air Quality Monitoring Stations C. Liang & P. Yu 10.3390/atmos12030300
136. Low-Cost Outdoor Air Quality Monitoring and Sensor Calibration F. Concas et al. 10.1145/3446005
137. Performance-based protocol for selection of economical portable sensor for air quality measurement N. Shukla et al. 10.1007/s10661-023-11438-9
138. Inter- versus Intracity Variations in the Performance and Calibration of Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensors: A Multicity Assessment in India S. V et al. 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.2c00257
139. From air quality sensors to sensor networks: Things we need to learn Y. Li et al. 10.1016/j.snb.2021.130958
140. How to Get the Best from Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors: Guidelines and Practical Recommendations E. Brattich et al. 10.3390/s20113073
141. Performance and Deployment of Low-Cost Particle Sensor Units to Monitor Biomass Burning Events and Their Application in an Educational Initiative F. Reisen et al. 10.3390/s21217206
142. Dissecting PM sensor capabilities: A combined experimental and theoretical study on particle sizing and physicochemical properties X. Qin et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124354
143. Laboratory and field evaluation of real-time and near real-time PM 2.5 smoke monitors A. Mehadi et al. 10.1080/10962247.2019.1654036
144. Advancing air quality monitoring: A low-cost sensor network in motion – Part I C. Correia et al. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121179
145. Applicability of factory calibrated optical particle counters for high-density air quality monitoring networks in Ghana C. Gameli Hodoli et al. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04206
146. Spatial and Temporal Variations in SO2 and PM2.5 Levels Around Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai'i During 2007–2018 R. Whitty et al. 10.3389/feart.2020.00036
147. Children’s microenvironmental exposure to PM2.5 and ozone and the impact of indoor air filtration K. Barkjohn et al. 10.1038/s41370-020-00266-5
148. Examination of monitoring approaches for ambient air pollution: A case study for India M. Brauer et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.116940
149. EEATC: A Novel Calibration Approach for Low-Cost Sensors M. Narayana et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2023.3304366
150. Long-term field comparison of multiple low-cost particulate matter sensors in an outdoor urban environment F. Bulot et al. 10.1038/s41598-019-43716-3
151. Evaluation methods for low-cost particulate matter sensors J. Bean 10.5194/amt-14-7369-2021
152. Calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors: Model development for a multi-city epidemiological study M. Zusman et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2019.105329
153. Calibration of low-cost PurpleAir outdoor monitors using an improved method of calculating PM L. Wallace et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118432
154. High-resolution urban air pollution mapping J. Apte & C. Manchanda 10.1126/science.adq3678
155. Is hydrophobic coating on glass equally efficient in reducing % soiling loss of solar PVs in clean and polluted environments? A. Ratnaparkhi et al. 10.1016/j.solener.2023.112120
156. Tutorial: Guidelines for implementing low-cost sensor networks for aerosol monitoring N. Zimmerman 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105872
157. Evaluation of optical particulate matter sensors under realistic conditions of strong and mild urban pollution A. Masic et al. 10.5194/amt-13-6427-2020
158. Calibration of NO, SO2, and PM using Airify: A low-cost sensor cluster for air quality monitoring M. Ionascu et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2024.120841
159. Patterns of distributive environmental inequity under different PM2.5 air pollution scenarios for Salt Lake County public schools C. Mullen et al. 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109543
160. Global Ozone (GO3) Project and AQTreks: Use of evolving technologies by students and citizen scientists to monitor air pollutants J. Ellenburg et al. 10.1016/j.aeaoa.2019.100048
161. Seasonal Field Calibration of Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensors in Different Locations with Different Sources in Thailand R. Dejchanchaiwong et al. 10.3390/atmos14030496
162. Publicly available low-cost sensor measurements for PM2.5 exposure modeling: Guidance for monitor deployment and data selection J. Bi et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106897
163. A data-driven approach for characterizing community scale air pollution exposure disparities in inland Southern California K. Do et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2020.105704
164. Review of urban computing in air quality management as smart city service: An integrated IoT, AI, and cloud technology perspective A. Kaginalkar et al. 10.1016/j.uclim.2021.100972
165. Establishing A Sustainable Low-Cost Air Quality Monitoring Setup: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art M. Narayana et al. 10.3390/s22010394
166. Evaluation of nine machine learning regression algorithms for calibration of low-cost PM2.5 sensor V. Kumar & M. Sahu 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105809
167. Estimating Mass Concentration Using a Low-cost Portable Particle Counter Based on Full-year Observations: Issues to Obtain Reliable Atmospheric PM2.5 Data S. Ueda et al. 10.5572/ajae.2020.14.2.155
168. Performance evaluation of MOMA (MOment MAtching) – a remote network calibration technique for PM2.5 and PM10 sensors L. Weissert et al. 10.5194/amt-16-4709-2023
169. A hybrid approach for integrating micro-satellite images and sensors network-based ground measurements using deep learning for high-resolution prediction of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) over an indian city, lucknow V. Jain et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2024.120798
170. Measurements of PM<sub>2.5</sub> with PurpleAir under atmospheric conditions K. Ardon-Dryer et al. 10.5194/amt-13-5441-2020
171. The MAPM (Mapping Air Pollution eMissions) method for inferring particulate matter emissions maps at city scale from in situ concentration measurements: description and demonstration of capability B. Nathan et al. 10.5194/acp-21-14089-2021
172. Role of endogenous melatonin in pathophysiologic and oxidative stress responses to personal air pollutant exposures in asthmatic children L. He et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145709
173. Intelligent Air Pollution Sensors Calibration for Extreme Events and Drifts Monitoring M. Zaidan et al. 10.1109/TII.2022.3151782
174. Leveraging machine learning algorithms to advance low-cost air sensor calibration in stationary and mobile settings A. Wang et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119692
175. Physicochemical Characteristics and Formation of PM2.5 in Yongin, Korea—A Suburban Metropolitan Area I. Park et al. 10.1007/s13143-024-00371-7
176. Effects of individual ozone exposure on lung function in the elderly: a cross-sectional study in China J. Zhang et al. 10.1007/s11356-019-04324-w
177. Estimating long‐term time‐resolved indoor PM 2.5 of outdoor and indoor origin using easily obtainable inputs T. Xia et al. 10.1111/ina.12905
178. Differentiating local and regional drivers of exceedances of WHO PM2.5 standards with a low-cost sensor network in the greater male’ region (GMR) N. Khaleel et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2024.102341
179. Spectral analysis approach for assessing the accuracy of low-cost air quality sensor network data V. Kumar et al. 10.5194/amt-16-5415-2023
180. Assessing the sources of particles at an urban background site using both regulatory instruments and low-cost sensors – a comparative study D. Bousiotis et al. 10.5194/amt-14-4139-2021
181. Application of Machine Learning for the in-Field Correction of a PM2.5 Low-Cost Sensor Network W. Wang et al. 10.3390/s20175002
182. Suitability of Low-Cost Sensors for Submicron Aerosol Particle Measurement D. Stoll et al. 10.3390/asi6040069
183. Enhancing the reliability of particulate matter sensing by multivariate Tobit model using weather and air quality data W. Won et al. 10.1038/s41598-023-40468-z
184. Characterizing outdoor infiltration and indoor contribution of PM2.5 with citizen-based low-cost monitoring data J. Bi et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116763
185. Design and Evaluation of a Dryer System for IoT Hyperlocal Particulate Matter Monitoring Device E. Illueca Fernández et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2024.3364537
186. A national crowdsourced network of low-cost fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth monitors: results from the 2021 wildfire season in the United States E. Wendt et al. 10.1039/D3EA00086A
187. Qualification of the Alphasense optical particle counter for inline air quality monitoring S. Bezantakos et al. 10.1080/02786826.2020.1864276
188. Investigation of Changes in Atmospheric Pollutants due to the Cessation of Anthropogenic Activities: Spatial Heterogeneity and Complex Atmospheric Chemistry S. Tripathi et al. 10.1007/s41810-023-00175-8
189. Domain Adaptation-Based Deep Calibration of Low-Cost PM₂.₅ Sensors S. Jha et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2021.3118454
190. A comparative evaluation of different PV soiling estimation models using experimental investigations S. Sharma et al. 10.1016/j.esd.2023.02.008
191. Visualization of Dust Generation in Outdoor Workplaces Using A Wearable Particle Monitor and Global Navigation Satellite System S. SEKOGUCHI et al. 10.7888/juoeh.44.1
192. Performance of low-cost indoor air quality monitors for PM2.5 and PM10 from residential sources Z. Wang et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106654
193. Humidity, density, and inlet aspiration efficiency correction improve accuracy of a low-cost sensor during field calibration at a suburban site in the North-Western Indo-Gangetic plain (NW-IGP) H. Pawar & B. Sinha 10.1080/02786826.2020.1719971
194. A Multipollutant Smoke Emissions Sensing and Sampling Instrument Package for Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Development and Testing K. Nelson et al. 10.3390/fire2020032
195. Performance evaluation of twelve low-cost PM2.5 sensors at an ambient air monitoring site B. Feenstra et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.116946
196. Estimating the spatial variability of fine particles at the neighborhood scale using a distributed network of particle sensors R. Shafran-Nathan et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.117011
197. Using a network of lower-cost monitors to identify the influence of modifiable factors driving spatial patterns in fine particulate matter concentrations in an urban environment S. Rose Eilenberg et al. 10.1038/s41370-020-0255-x
198. Estimating vehicular emission factors and vehicle-induced turbulence: Application of an air quality sensor array for continuous multipoint monitoring in a tunnel H. Song et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2023.101799
199. Significance of sources and size distribution on calibration of low-cost particle sensors: Evidence from a field sampling campaign V. Malyan et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2022.106114
200. Evaluation of Two Low-Cost Optical Particle Counters for the Measurement of Ambient Aerosol Scattering Coefficient and Ångström Exponent K. Markowicz & M. Chiliński 10.3390/s20092617
201. Development of a physics-based method for calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors and comparison with machine learning models B. Prajapati et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2023.106284
202. Carbon based sensors for air quality monitoring networks; middle east perspective I. Shahid et al. 10.3389/fchem.2024.1391409
203. Testing a New “Decrypted” Algorithm for Plantower Sensors Measuring PM2.5: Comparison with an Alternative Algorithm L. Wallace 10.3390/a16080392
204. Economical portable sensor based hybrid monitoring for high-resolution air pollution mapping at an urban hotspot S. Gulia et al. 10.1007/s11869-024-01589-0
205. A new evaluation method of three different low-cost dust sensors using exponentially decaying particle concentrations K. Kang et al. 10.4491/eer.2020.501
206. Community-Based Measurements Reveal Unseen Differences during Air Pollution Episodes K. Kelly et al. 10.1021/acs.est.0c02341
207. Determination of Air Quality Life Index (Aqli) in Medinipur City of West Bengal(India) During 2019 To 2020 : A contextual Study S. Rana 10.12944/CWE.17.1.12
208. Evaluation and Application of a Novel Low-Cost Wearable Sensing Device in Assessing Real-Time PM2.5 Exposure in Major Asian Transportation Modes W. Wang et al. 10.3390/atmos12020270
209. Effects of Road Traffic on the Accuracy and Bias of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor Measurements in Houston, Texas T. Oluwadairo et al. 10.3390/ijerph19031086
210. Evaluation of a low-cost multi-channel monitor for indoor air quality through a novel, low-cost, and reproducible platform A. Baldelli 10.1016/j.measen.2021.100059
211. Calibration of CO, NO2, and O3 Using Airify: A Low-Cost Sensor Cluster for Air Quality Monitoring M. Ionascu et al. 10.3390/s21237977
212. In chamber calibration and performance evaluation of air quality low-cost sensors D. Agrawal et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2024.102299
213. Detection of PM2.5 plume movement from IoT ground level monitoring data T. Kanabkaew et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.05.082
214. Embedded machine learning of IoT streams to promote early detection of unsafe environments E. Fernández et al. 10.1016/j.iot.2024.101128
215. Connecting Air Quality with Emotional Well-Being and Neighborhood Infrastructure in a US City R. Lal et al. 10.1177/1178630220915488
216. Toxic volatile organic compounds in 20 homes in Shanghai: Concentrations, inhalation health risks, and the impacts of household air cleaning L. Fang et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.04.047
217. Forecasting the Exceedances of PM2.5 in an Urban Area S. Logothetis et al. 10.3390/atmos15050594
218. Elemental: An Open-Source Wireless Hardware and Software Platform for Building Energy and Indoor Environmental Monitoring and Control A. Ali et al. 10.3390/s19184017
219. Influence of particle properties and environmental factors on the performance of typical particle monitors and low-cost particle sensors in the market of China D. Wu et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118825
220. Application of low-cost fine particulate mass monitors to convert satellite aerosol optical depth to surface concentrations in North America and Africa C. Malings et al. 10.5194/amt-13-3873-2020
221. The Impacts of Prescribed Fire on PM2.5 Air Quality and Human Health: Application to Asthma-Related Emergency Room Visits in Georgia, USA R. Huang et al. 10.3390/ijerph16132312
222. Advantages and challenges of the implementation of a low-cost particulate matter monitoring system as a decision-making tool V. Caquilpán P. et al. 10.1007/s10661-019-7875-4
223. A Review of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors from the Developers’ Perspectives B. Alfano et al. 10.3390/s20236819
224. An experimental application of laser-scattering sensor to estimate the traffic-induced PM2.5 in Beijing X. Liu et al. 10.1007/s10661-020-08398-9
225. Application and evaluation of a low-cost PM sensor and data fusion with CMAQ simulations to quantify the impacts of prescribed burning on air quality in Southwestern Georgia, USA R. Huang et al. 10.1080/10962247.2021.1924311
226. AirKit: A Citizen-Sensing Toolkit for Monitoring Air Quality S. Mahajan et al. 10.3390/s21124044