Articles | Volume 16, issue 1
Research article
13 Jan 2023
Research article |  | 13 Jan 2023

Identifying optimal co-location calibration periods for low-cost sensors

Misti Levy Zamora, Colby Buehler, Abhirup Datta, Drew R. Gentner, and Kirsten Koehler


Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-200', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 May 2022
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Misti Levy Zamora, 30 Nov 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-200', Sreekanth Vakacherla, 02 Nov 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Misti Levy Zamora, 30 Nov 2022

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload
AR by Misti Levy Zamora on behalf of the Authors (30 Nov 2022)  Author's response   Author's tracked changes   Manuscript 
ED: Publish as is (11 Dec 2022) by Maria Dolores Andrés Hernández
AR by Misti Levy Zamora on behalf of the Authors (19 Dec 2022)  Author's response   Manuscript 
Short summary
We assessed five pairs of co-located reference and low-cost sensor data sets (PM2.5, O3, NO2, NO, and CO) to make recommendations for best practices regarding the field calibration of low-cost air quality sensors. We found diminishing improvements for calibration periods longer than about 6 weeks for all sensors and that co-location can be minimized if the period is strategically selected and monitored so that the calibration period is representative of the desired measurement setting.