201 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Evaluation of two low-cost PM monitors under different laboratory and indoor conditions R. He et al. 10.1080/02786826.2020.1851649
2. Data-Driven Techniques for Low-Cost Sensor Selection and Calibration for the Use Case of Air Quality Monitoring R. Kureshi et al. 10.3390/s22031093
3. 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
4. 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
5. An application of low-cost sensors to monitor children's exposure to air pollution at five schools in Queensland, Australia B. Pradhan et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2024.120424
6. Ambient air quality measurements in a large city: existing solutions, new opportunities and challenges E. Lezina & M. Misyurev 10.1088/1742-6596/2192/1/012031
7. Assessment of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor Systems against Optical and Gravimetric Methods in a Field Co-Location in Norway M. Vogt et al. 10.3390/atmos12080961
8. 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
9. Unilateral boundary time series forecasting C. Chang et al. 10.3389/fdata.2024.1376023
10. Common model to approximate the time-variant behaviour of air humidity-change influence on some fundamental standards of precision electromagnetic measurement L. Liu et al. 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108647
11. Can data reliability of low-cost sensor devices for indoor air particulate matter monitoring be improved? – An approach using machine learning H. Chojer et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2022.119251
12. Bias in PM2.5 measurements using collocated reference-grade and optical instruments M. Kushwaha et al. 10.1007/s10661-022-10293-4
13. PM2.5 reduction capacities and their relation to morphological and physiological traits in 13 landscaping tree species K. Kim et al. 10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127526
14. Low-Cost Indoor Sensor Deployment for Predicting PM2.5 Exposure S. Tsameret et al. 10.1021/acsestair.3c00105
15. 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
16. Innovative Air-Preconditioning Method for Accurate Particulate Matter Sensing in Humid Environments Z. Kunić et al. 10.3390/s24175477
17. 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
18. Calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors for coal dust monitoring N. Amoah et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160336
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. Developing a Cloud-Based Air Quality Monitoring Platform Using Low-Cost Sensors A. Samad et al. 10.3390/s24030945
21. Feasibility of low-cost particulate matter sensors for long-term environmental monitoring: Field evaluation and calibration Z. Feng et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174089
22. Effects of aerosol type and simulated aging on performance of low-cost PM sensors J. Tryner et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2020.105654
23. MitH: A framework for Mitigating Hygroscopicity in low-cost PM sensors M. Casari & L. Po 10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.105955
24. Indoor Air Pollution from Residential Stoves: Examining the Flooding of Particulate Matter into Homes during Real-World Use R. Chakraborty et al. 10.3390/atmos11121326
25. Development and evaluation of correction models for a low-cost fine particulate matter monitor B. Nilson et al. 10.5194/amt-15-3315-2022
26. Effects of Gas and Steam Humidity on Particulate Matter Measurements Obtained Using Light-Scattering Sensors H. Kim et al. 10.3390/s23136199
27. Development and performance evaluation of a mixed-sensor system for fine particles and road traffic noise C. Wu et al. 10.1016/j.eti.2022.102902
28. In-kitchen aerosol exposure in twelve cities across the globe P. Kumar et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107155
29. 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
30. Household air pollution and its impact on human health: the case of Vihiga County, Kenya C. Ang’u et al. 10.1007/s11869-022-01249-1
31. Characterising temporal variability of PM2.5/PM10 ratio and its correlation with meteorological variables at a sub-urban site in the Taj City S. Bamola et al. 10.1016/j.uclim.2023.101763
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. Particle number size distribution evaluation of Plantower PMS5003 low-cost PM sensors – a field experiment A. Caseiro et al. 10.1039/D4EA00086B
34. 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
35. Urban meteorology and air quality in a rapidly growing city: Inter-parameter associations and intra-urban heterogeneity G. Ulpiani et al. 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103553
36. Assessing the value of complex refractive index and particle density for calibration of low-cost particle matter sensor for size-resolved particle count and PM2.5 measurements C. Huang et al. 10.1371/journal.pone.0259745
37. Low-Cost Sensor Node for Air Quality Monitoring: Field Tests and Validation of Particulate Matter Measurements U. Schilt et al. 10.3390/s23020794
38. IoT-Enabled Particulate Matter Monitoring and Forecasting Method Based on Cluster Analysis J. Yun & J. Woo 10.1109/JIOT.2020.3038862
39. 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
40. Analyzing and Improving the Performance of a Particulate Matter Low Cost Air Quality Monitoring Device E. Bagkis et al. 10.3390/atmos12020251
41. The relationship between greenspace and personal exposure to PM2.5 during walking trips in Delhi, India W. Mueller et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119294
42. The nexus between in-car aerosol concentrations, ventilation and the risk of respiratory infection P. Kumar et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106814
43. Evaluation of a low-cost dryer for a low-cost optical particle counter M. Chacón-Mateos et al. 10.5194/amt-15-7395-2022
44. Laboratory evaluation of particle-size selectivity of optical low-cost particulate matter sensors J. Kuula et al. 10.5194/amt-13-2413-2020
45. The application of a multi-channel sensor network to decompose the local and background sources and quantify their contributions X. Qin et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110005
46. Performance assessment of NOVA SDS011 low-cost PM sensor in various microenvironments A. Božilov et al. 10.1007/s10661-022-10290-7
47. 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
48. Improved Fine Particles Monitoring in Smart Cities by Means of Advanced Data Concentrator P. Castello et al. 10.1109/TIM.2020.3031987
49. Development of ASTM International D8405—Standard Test Method for Evaluating PM 2.5 Sensors or Sensor Systems Used in Indoor Applications W. Mui et al. 10.1080/15459624.2023.2212739
50. Field Evaluation and Calibration of Low-Cost Air Pollution Sensors for Environmental Exposure Research J. Huang et al. 10.3390/s22062381
51. Air Quality Sensors Systems as Tools to Support Guidance in Athletics Stadia for Elite and Recreational Athletes M. Viana et al. 10.3390/ijerph19063561
52. Sensor network for PM2.5 measurements on an academic campus area M. Badura et al. 10.1051/e3sconf/201911600004
53. Gas sensing properties of AACVD-derived ZnO/Co3O4 bilayer thin film nanocomposites A. Mokrushin et al. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.12.194
54. 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
55. On-field test and data calibration of a low-cost sensor for fine particles exposure assessment Y. Jiang et al. 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.111958
56. ‘Envilution™’ chamber for performance evaluation of low-cost sensors H. Omidvarborna et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117264
57. 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
58. 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
59. Laboratory and field evaluation of a low-cost optical particle sizer M. Tang et al. 10.1016/j.jes.2023.06.031
60. 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
61. A novel low-cost sensors system for real-time multipollutant indoor air quality monitoring – Development and performance H. Chojer et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2024.112055
62. Investigating the effect of trees on urban quality in Dublin by combining air monitoring with i-Tree Eco model E. Riondato et al. 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102356
63. Dynamic and stationary monitoring of air pollutant exposures and dose during marathons C. Ribalta et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171997
64. 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
65. Low-cost electronic sensors for environmental research: Pitfalls and opportunities K. Chan et al. 10.1177/0309133320956567
66. Real‐time measurements of PM2.5and ozone to assess the effectiveness of residential indoor air filtration in Shanghai homes K. Barkjohn et al. 10.1111/ina.12716
67. Particulate Matter Profiles along the Rack Railway Route Using Low-Cost Sensor A. Samad et al. 10.3390/atmos12020126
68. 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
69. Ambient characterisation of PurpleAir particulate matter monitors for measurements to be considered as indicative A. Caseiro et al. 10.1039/D2EA00085G
70. Performance characteristics of the low-cost Plantower PMS optical sensor M. He et al. 10.1080/02786826.2019.1696015
71. 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
72. Evaluation and calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors for respirable coal mine dust monitoring Z. Feng et al. 10.1080/02786826.2023.2288609
73. Features and Practicability of the Next-Generation Sensors and Monitors for Exposure Assessment to Airborne Pollutants: A Systematic Review G. Fanti et al. 10.3390/s21134513
74. A Novel Bike-Mounted Sensing Device with Cloud Connectivity for Dynamic Air-Quality Monitoring by Urban Cyclists J. Gómez-Suárez et al. 10.3390/s22031272
75. 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
76. Band-Sensitive Calibration of Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensors by LSTM Model with Dynamically Weighted Loss Function J. Ryu & H. Park 10.3390/su14106120
77. Investigating a Low-Cost Dryer Designed for Low-Cost PM Sensors Measuring Ambient Air Quality A. Samad et al. 10.3390/s21030804
78. City Scale Particulate Matter Monitoring Using LoRaWAN Based Air Quality IoT Devices S. Johnston et al. 10.3390/s19010209
79. Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on air quality of Sri Lankan cities M. Senarathna et al. 10.11159/ijepr.2021.002
80. 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
81. Assessing Inequitable Urban Heat Islands and Air Pollution Disparities with Low-Cost Sensors in Richmond, Virginia A. Eanes et al. 10.3390/su122310089
82. 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
83. 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
84. 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
85. A Smoke Chamber Study on Some Low-Cost Sensors for Monitoring Size-Segregated Aerosol and Microclimatic Parameters L. Bencs & A. Nagy 10.3390/atmos15030304
86. In-Vehicle Air Pollutant Exposures from Daily Commute in the San Francisco Bay Area, California R. Deevi & M. Lu 10.3390/atmos15091130
87. An efficient spatiotemporal data calibration approach for the low-cost PM2.5 sensing network: A case study in Taiwan C. Lee et al. 10.1016/j.envint.2019.05.032
88. AirMLP: A Multilayer Perceptron Neural Network for Temporal Correction of PM2.5 Values in Turin M. Casari et al. 10.3390/s23239446
89. Comparative Study on the Use of Some Low-Cost Optical Particulate Sensors for Rapid Assessment of Local Air Quality Changes L. Bencs et al. 10.3390/atmos13081218
90. Uncertainty-Based Calibration Method for Environmental Sensors—Application to Chlorine and pH Monitoring With Carbon Nanotube Sensor Array G. Perrin & B. Lebental 10.1109/JSEN.2023.3238900
91. 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
92. 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
93. Catastrophic impact of extreme 2019 Indonesian peatland fires on urban air quality and health M. Grosvenor et al. 10.1038/s43247-024-01813-w
94. Effect of relative humidity on the performance of five cost-effective PM sensors P. Wang et al. 10.1080/02786826.2021.1910136
95. Opportunistic mobile air quality mapping using sensors on postal service vehicles: from point clouds to actionable insights J. Hofman et al. 10.3389/fenvh.2023.1232867
96. 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
97. A novel application of mobile low-cost sensors for atmospheric particulate matter monitoring in open-pit mines A. Zafra-Pérez et al. 10.1016/j.eti.2022.102974
98. Effect of air quality improvement by urban parks on mitigating PM2.5 and its associated heavy metals: A mobile-monitoring field study T. Su et al. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116283
99. Theoretical Design of the Scattering-Based Sensor for Analysis of the Vehicle Tailpipe Emission S. Molaie & P. Lino 10.3390/mi11121085
100. Measurement of Air Pollution Parameters in Montenegro Using the Ecomar System N. Zaric et al. 10.3390/ijerph18126565
101. The Metrological Qualification of Commercial VOC Multisensor Systems: A Mandatory Step Prior to Indoor Air Quality Monitoring M. Verriele et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2024.3368285
102. Calibration Methods for Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors Considering Seasonal Variability J. Kang & K. Choi 10.3390/s24103023
103. First in-Lab Testing of a Cost-Effective Prototype for PM2.5 Monitoring: The P.ALP Assessment G. Fanti et al. 10.3390/s24185915
104. Civil air quality monitoring as an alternative and supplement to the National Air Quality Monitoring Network A. Bozilov et al. 10.2298/TSCI220303103B
105. PM sensors as an indicator of overall air quality: Pre-COVID and COVID periods J. Prakash et al. 10.1016/j.apr.2022.101594
106. Correction and Accuracy of PurpleAir PM2.5 Measurements for Extreme Wildfire Smoke K. Barkjohn et al. 10.3390/s22249669
107. 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
108. 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
109. Developing Relative Humidity and Temperature Corrections for Low-Cost Sensors Using Machine Learning I. Vajs et al. 10.3390/s21103338
110. Evaluation of Low-Cost Sensors for Ambient PM2.5 Monitoring M. Badura et al. 10.1155/2018/5096540
111. Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors in Beijing H. Mei et al. 10.3390/s20164381
112. Deployment and Evaluation of a Network of Open Low-Cost Air Quality Sensor Systems P. Schneider et al. 10.3390/atmos14030540
113. Improving PM10 sensor accuracy in urban areas through calibration in Timișoara R. Blaga & S. Gautam 10.1038/s41612-024-00812-0
114. Ambient PM2.5 and PM10 Exposure and Respiratory Disease Hospitalization in Kandy, Sri Lanka S. Priyankara et al. 10.3390/ijerph18189617
115. Environmental storage conditions influencing the filtration behavior of electret filters with repeated use J. Lee et al. 10.1177/15280837221119411
116. Laboratory Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors to Measure Transient Events of Pollution F. Bulot et al. 10.3390/s20082219
117. Air Pollution Measurements and Land-Use Regression in Urban Sub-Saharan Africa Using Low-Cost Sensors—Possibilities and Pitfalls A. Abera et al. 10.3390/atmos11121357
118. Development and Performance Evaluation of a Mixed-Sensor System for Fine Particles and Road Traffic Noise C. Wu et al. 10.2139/ssrn.4020749
119. Investigation of indoor air quality in university residences using low-cost sensors R. Afroz et al. 10.1039/D2EA00149G
120. PM2.5 exposure of various microenvironments in a community: Characteristics and applications W. Hsu et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114522
121. 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
122. 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
123. 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
124. A Low-Cost Sensor System Installed in Buses to Monitor Air Quality in Cities C. Correia et al. 10.3390/ijerph20054073
125. From air quality sensors to sensor networks: Things we need to learn Y. Li et al. 10.1016/j.snb.2021.130958
126. Laboratory evaluation of low-cost PurpleAir PM monitors and in-field correction using co-located portable filter samplers J. Tryner et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.117067
127. How to Get the Best from Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors: Guidelines and Practical Recommendations E. Brattich et al. 10.3390/s20113073
128. Efficacy of Air Filtration and Education Interventions on Indoor Fine Particulate Matter and Child Lower Respiratory Tract Infections among Rural U.S. Homes Heated with Wood Stoves: Results from the KidsAIR Randomized Trial E. Walker et al. 10.1289/EHP9932
129. 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
130. Establishing A Sustainable Low-Cost Air Quality Monitoring Setup: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art M. Narayana et al. 10.3390/s22010394
131. New Water and Air Pollution Sensors Added to the Sonic Kayak Citizen Science System for Low Cost Environmental Mapping A. Griffiths et al. 10.5334/joh.35
132. 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
133. The approach to adjusting commercial PM2.5 sensors with a filter-based gravimetric method W. Wang et al. 10.1051/e3sconf/202339601119
134. 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
135. 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
136. Investigation of Low-Cost and Optical Particulate Matter Sensors for Ambient Monitoring M. Rogulski & A. Badyda 10.3390/atmos11101040
137. 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
138. Use of a Distributed Micro-sensor System for Monitoring the Indoor Particulate Matter Concentration in the Atmosphere of Ferroalloy Production Plants H. Myklebust et al. 10.1007/s11837-022-05487-7
139. 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
140. Gas source localization and mapping with mobile robots: A review A. Francis et al. 10.1002/rob.22109
141. 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
142. Advancing air quality monitoring: A low-cost sensor network in motion – Part I C. Correia et al. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121179
143. Precision and Accuracy of a Direct-Reading Miniaturized Monitor in PM2.5 Exposure Assessment F. Borghi et al. 10.3390/s18093089
144. Low-Cost Investigation into Sources of PM2.5 in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo D. Westervelt et al. 10.1021/acsestair.3c00024
145. Added Value of Vaisala AQT530 Sensors as a Part of a Sensor Network for Comprehensive Air Quality Monitoring T. Petäjä et al. 10.3389/fenvs.2021.719567
146. Tutorial: Guidelines for implementing low-cost sensor networks for aerosol monitoring N. Zimmerman 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105872
147. Relationship Between the Concentrations Of PM2.5 Indoors Obtained by Using the Optical and Gravimetric Methods: Preliminary Analysis J. PASTUSZKA 10.21307/acee-2020-035
148. Deployment of networked low-cost sensors and comparison to real-time stationary monitors in New Delhi J. Prakash et al. 10.1080/10962247.2021.1890276
149. Effect of aerosol composition on the performance of low-cost optical particle counter correction factors L. Crilley et al. 10.5194/amt-13-1181-2020
150. 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
151. Evaluating the Performance of Low-Cost Air Quality Monitors in Dallas, Texas H. Khreis et al. 10.3390/ijerph19031647
152. Moisture Removal Techniques for a Continuous Emission Monitoring System: A Review T. Dinh & J. Kim 10.3390/atmos12010061
153. Performance of Aether Low-Cost Sensor Device for Air Pollution Measurements in Urban Environments. Accuracy Evaluation Applying the Air Quality Index (AQI) G. Spyropoulos et al. 10.3390/atmos12101246
154. Hygroscopic properties of particulate matter and effects of their interactions with weather on visibility W. Won et al. 10.1038/s41598-021-95834-6
155. A Network of Field-Calibrated Low-Cost Sensor Measurements of PM2.5 in Lomé, Togo, Over One to Two Years G. Raheja et al. 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.1c00391
156. 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
157. Design and Evaluation of a Dryer System for IoT Hyperlocal Particulate Matter Monitoring Device E. Illueca Fernández et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2024.3364537
158. Miniature Optical Particle Counter and Analyzer Involving a Fluidic-Optronic CMOS Chip Coupled with a Millimeter-Sized Glass Optical System G. Jobert et al. 10.3390/s21093181
159. Analysis of indoor and outdoor particulate (PM2.5) at a women and children’s hospital in West Jakarta H. Yulinawati et al. 10.1088/1755-1315/737/1/012067
160. Measurements of PM<sub>2.5</sub> with PurpleAir under atmospheric conditions K. Ardon-Dryer et al. 10.5194/amt-13-5441-2020
161. Portable Sensors for Dynamic Exposure Assessments in Urban Environments: State of the Science J. Hofman et al. 10.3390/s24175653
162. Utilization of scattering and absorption-based particulate matter sensors in the environment impacted by residential wood combustion J. Kuula et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2020.105671
163. 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
164. 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
165. A quadcopter unmanned aerial system (UAS)-based methodology for measuring biomass burning emission factors R. Vernooij et al. 10.5194/amt-15-4271-2022
166. Low-cost sensors and Machine Learning aid in identifying environmental factors affecting particulate matter emitted by household heating A. Hassani et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.120108
167. Applicability of the low-cost OPC-N3 optical particle counter for microphysical measurements of fog K. Nurowska et al. 10.5194/amt-16-2415-2023
168. Qualification of the Alphasense optical particle counter for inline air quality monitoring S. Bezantakos et al. 10.1080/02786826.2020.1864276
169. Network of low-cost air quality sensors for monitoring indoor, outdoor, and personal PM2.5 exposure in Seattle during the 2020 wildfire season J. He et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2022.119244
170. Community-based participatory research for low-cost air pollution monitoring in the wake of unconventional oil and gas development in the Ohio River Valley: Empowering impacted residents through community science G. Raheja et al. 10.1088/1748-9326/ac6ad6
171. 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
172. An integrated strategy for air quality monitoring and management in industrial port areas M. López et al. 10.1016/j.clet.2024.100729
173. Use of Low-Cost Ambient Particulate Sensors in Nablus, Palestine with Application to the Assessment of Regional Dust Storms A. Khader & R. Martin 10.3390/atmos10090539
174. 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
175. 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
176. Ubiquity of hazardous airborne substances on passenger ferries A. Targino et al. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127133
177. Proposal for concentration calibration method for field evaluation of particulate matters monitors based on light scattering using decision tree techniques S. Park et al. 10.15250/joie.2023.22.4.314
178. 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
179. 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
180. Design Considerations for a Distributed Low-Cost Air Quality Sensing System for Urban Environments in Low-Resource Settings E. Bainomugisha et al. 10.3390/atmos14020354
181. Cross-concentration calibration of low-cost sensors for effective dust monitoring at construction sites L. Zheng et al. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2024.106456
182. Laboratory Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors to Measure Transient Events of Pollution—Part B—Particle Number Concentrations F. Bulot et al. 10.3390/s23177657
183. Diurnal and seasonal source‐proximal dust concentrations in complex terrain, West Greenland J. Bullard et al. 10.1002/esp.5661
184. Citizen-operated mobile low-cost sensors for urban PM2.5 monitoring: field calibration, uncertainty estimation, and application A. Hassani et al. 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104607
185. Assessing the usefulness of dense sensor network for PM2.5 monitoring on an academic campus area M. Badura et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137867
186. Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke A. Holder et al. 10.3390/s20174796
187. Calibration of Portable Particulate Matter–Monitoring Device using Web Query and Machine Learning B. Loh & G. Choi 10.1016/j.shaw.2019.08.002
188. Effect of environmental conditions on the performance of a low-cost atmospheric particulate matter sensor B. Macías-Hernández et al. 10.1016/j.uclim.2023.101753
189. Reducing Construction Dust Pollution by Planning Construction Site Layout G. Tao et al. 10.3390/buildings12050531
190. A parent-school initiative to assess and predict air quality around a heavily trafficked school P. Kumar et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160587
191. Development and Implementation of a Platform for Public Information on Air Quality, Sensor Measurements, and Citizen Science J. Wesseling et al. 10.3390/atmos10080445
192. In Situ Calibration Algorithms for Environmental Sensor Networks: A Review F. Delaine et al. 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2910317
193. Spatial calibration and PM2.5 mapping of low-cost air quality sensors H. Chu et al. 10.1038/s41598-020-79064-w
194. An overview of outdoor low-cost gas-phase air quality sensor deployments: current efforts, trends, and limitations K. Okorn & L. Iraci 10.5194/amt-17-6425-2024
195. Methodology for Addressing Infectious Aerosol Persistence in Real-Time Using Sensor Network S. Makhsous et al. 10.3390/s21113928
196. 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
197. Preliminary research for low-cost particulate matter sensor network C. Báthory et al. 10.1051/e3sconf/201910000004
198. 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
199. 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
200. Design and evaluation of a portable PM2.5 monitor featuring a low-cost sensor in line with an active filter sampler J. Tryner et al. 10.1039/C9EM00234K
201. Impact of California Fires on Local and Regional Air Quality: The Role of a Low‐Cost Sensor Network and Satellite Observations P. Gupta et al. 10.1029/2018GH000136