66 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Mobile Observations of Ozone and Aerosols in Alabama: Southeastern US Summer Pollution and Coastal Variability S. Kuang et al. 10.1029/2023JD039514
2. 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
3. Assessing the contributions of outdoor and indoor sources to air quality in London homes of the SCAMP cohort T. Vu et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109359
4. Health impacts of smoke exposure in South America: increased risk for populations in the Amazonian Indigenous territories E. Bonilla et al. 10.1088/2752-5309/acb22b
5. Correction and Accuracy of PurpleAir PM2.5 Measurements for Extreme Wildfire Smoke K. Barkjohn et al. 10.3390/s22249669
6. The Aerosol Research Observation Station (AEROS) K. Ardon-Dryer et al. 10.5194/amt-15-2345-2022
7. 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
8. A Review of Literature on the Usage of Low-Cost Sensors to Measure Particulate Matter A. Raysoni et al. 10.3390/earth4010009
9. A Novel AI Framework for PM Pollution Prediction Applied to a Greek Port City F. Anagnostopoulos et al. 10.3390/atmos14091413
10. Exposure to PM2.5 on Public Transport: Guidance for Field Measurements with Low-Cost Sensors K. Fameli et al. 10.3390/atmos15030330
11. A framework for integrated energy and exposure to ambient pollution (iEnEx) assessment toward low-carbon, healthy, and equitable cities M. Ashayeri & N. Abbasabadi 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103647
12. Observationally constrained mass balance box model analysis of aerosol mitigation potential using fan powered filters S. Wang et al. 10.1088/2515-7620/ad1422
13. 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
14. Improvement of Surface PM2.5 Diurnal Variation Simulations in East Africa for the MAIA Satellite Mission C. Li et al. 10.1021/acsestair.3c00008
15. Application of an Ultra-Low-Cost Passive Sampler for Light-Absorbing Carbon in Mongolia B. Bekbulat et al. 10.3390/s23218977
16. 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
17. Community-Based Measurements Reveal Unseen Differences during Air Pollution Episodes K. Kelly et al. 10.1021/acs.est.0c02341
18. A dynamic spatial filtering approach to mitigate underestimation bias in field calibrated low-cost sensor air pollution data C. Heffernan et al. 10.1214/23-AOAS1751
19. COVID‐19 New Cases and Environmental Factors During Wet and Dry Seasons in West and Southern Africa G. Jenkins et al. 10.1029/2022GH000765
20. Socioeconomic Disparities of Low-Cost Air Quality Sensors in California, 2017–2020 Y. Sun et al. 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306603
21. 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
22. Information entropy tradeoffs for efficient uncertainty reduction in estimates of air pollution mortality M. Alifa et al. 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113587
23. Calibration Methods for Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors Considering Seasonal Variability J. Kang & K. Choi 10.3390/s24103023
24. Spatialized PM2.5 during COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil’s most populous southern city: implications for post-pandemic era G. da Costa et al. 10.1007/s10653-023-01809-z
25. Performance Assessment of Two Low-Cost PM2.5 and PM10 Monitoring Networks in the Padana Plain (Italy) G. Gualtieri et al. 10.3390/s24123946
26. The Lack of Real-Time Air Pollution Monitoring in Africa Supports Environmental Injustice G. Jenkins 10.1089/env.2023.0030
27. Impact of 4th of July Fireworks on Spatiotemporal PM2.5 Concentrations in California Based on the PurpleAir Sensor Network: Implications for Policy and Environmental Justice A. Mousavi et al. 10.3390/ijerph18115735
28. Wildfire smoke impacts on indoor air quality assessed using crowdsourced data in California Y. Liang et al. 10.1073/pnas.2106478118
29. Temporal Characteristics and Sources of PM2.5 in Porto Velho of Amazon Region in Brazil from 2020 to 2022 Y. Jang & G. Jung 10.3390/su151814012
30. Combining Regulatory Instruments and Low-Cost Sensors to Quantify the Effects of 2020 California Wildfires on PM2.5 in San Joaquin Valley F. Enayati Ahangar et al. 10.3390/fire5030064
31. Assessment of particulate matter and particle path trajectory analysis using a HYSPLIT model over Dire Dawa, Ethiopia T. Endale et al. 10.1007/s42452-024-05741-4
32. Developing high-resolution PM2.5 exposure models by integrating low-cost sensors, automated machine learning, and big human mobility data M. Yu et al. 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1223160
33. Assessing low-cost sensor for characterizing temporal variation of PM2.5 in Bandung, Indonesia S. Kurniawati et al. 10.1016/j.kjs.2024.100297
34. 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
35. Differences in Ozone and Particulate Matter Between Ground Level and 20 m Aloft are Frequent During Wintertime Surface‐Based Temperature Inversions in Fairbanks, Alaska M. Cesler‐Maloney et al. 10.1029/2021JD036215
36. Effectiveness of Air Filtration in Reducing PM2.5 Exposures at a School in a Community Heavily Impacted by Air Pollution M. Thompson et al. 10.3390/atmos15080901
37. Race and Street-Level Firework Legalization as Primary Determinants of July 4th Air Pollution across Southern California S. Masri et al. 10.3390/atmos14020401
38. Air quality monitoring and measurement in an urban airshed: Contextualizing datasets from the Detroit Michigan area from 1952 to 2020 B. O'Leary et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152120
39. Highly local sources and large spatial variations in PM2.5 across a city: evidence from a city-wide sensor network in Cork, Ireland R. Byrne et al. 10.1039/D2EA00177B
40. Long-Term Assessment of PurpleAir Low-Cost Sensor for PM2.5 in California, USA Z. Farooqui et al. 10.3390/pollutants3040033
41. Indoor-Generated PM2.5 During COVID-19 Shutdowns Across California: Application of the PurpleAir Indoor–Outdoor Low-Cost Sensor Network A. Mousavi & J. Wu 10.1021/acs.est.0c06937
42. Measurements of traffic-related air pollution at a U.S.–Mexico port of entry and its impacts on nearby community W. Li et al. 10.1007/s44274-023-00010-4
43. Nano to micron-size combustion particles in smokers’ homes: Magnetic properties of tobacco and cigarette ashes M. Chaparro et al. 10.1016/j.envpol.2024.125276
44. Development and evaluation of correction models for a low-cost fine particulate matter monitor B. Nilson et al. 10.5194/amt-15-3315-2022
45. Compound Risk of Air Pollution and Heat Days and the Influence of Wildfire by SES across California, 2018–2020: Implications for Environmental Justice in the Context of Climate Change S. Masri et al. 10.3390/cli10100145
46. Assessing urban mortality from wildfires with a citizen science network P. Shen et al. 10.1007/s11869-021-01072-0
47. 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
48. Polluting Under the Radar: Emissions, Inequality, and Concrete Batch Plants in Houston N. Zirogiannis et al. 10.2139/ssrn.4470152
49. Particle number size distribution evaluation of Plantower PMS5003 low-cost PM sensors – a field experiment A. Caseiro et al. 10.1039/D4EA00086B
50. Quantifying impact of correlated predictors on low-cost sensor PM2.5 data using KZ filter V. Kumar et al. 10.3389/fams.2024.1368147
51. The Role of Meteorological Variables and Aerosols in the Transmission of COVID‐19 During Harmattan Season S. Ogunjo et al. 10.1029/2021GH000521
52. Polluting under the Radar: Emissions, Inequality, and Concrete Batch Plants in Houston N. Zirogiannis et al. 10.1021/acs.est.3c04412
53. Evaluation of calibration approaches for indoor deployments of PurpleAir monitors K. Koehler et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119944
54. Increasing co-occurrence of fine particulate matter and ground-level ozone extremes in the western United States D. Kalashnikov et al. 10.1126/sciadv.abi9386
55. Calibration of SpatioTemporal forecasts from citizen science urban air pollution data with sparse recurrent neural networks M. Bonas & S. Castruccio 10.1214/22-AOAS1683
56. Field and laboratory evaluation of PurpleAir low-cost aerosol sensors in monitoring indoor airborne particles S. Park et al. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110127
57. 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
58. 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
59. Air Quality Monitoring with Low-Cost Sensors: A Record of the Increase of PM2.5 during Christmas and New Year’s Eve Celebrations in the City of Queretaro, Mexico A. Rodríguez-Trejo et al. 10.3390/atmos15080879
60. The present state of low-cost air quality sensors in Japan and their accuracy M. Lassalle 10.1080/00207233.2024.2358716
61. An evaluation of the U.S. EPA's correction equation for PurpleAir sensor data in smoke, dust, and wintertime urban pollution events D. Jaffe et al. 10.5194/amt-16-1311-2023
62. Evaluation and Correction of PurpleAir Temperature and Relative Humidity Measurements E. Couzo et al. 10.3390/atmos15040415
63. 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
64. 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
65. 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
66. An analysis of degradation in low-cost particulate matter sensors P. deSouza et al. 10.1039/D2EA00142J