Articles | Volume 16, issue 21
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-5415-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-5415-2023
Research article
 | 
13 Nov 2023
Research article |  | 13 Nov 2023

Spectral analysis approach for assessing the accuracy of low-cost air quality sensor network data

Vijay Kumar, Dinushani Senarathna, Supraja Gurajala, William Olsen, Shantanu Sur, Sumona Mondal, and Suresh Dhaniyala

Related authors

Laminar gas inlet – Part 2: Wind tunnel chemical transmission measurement and modelling
Da Yang, Emmanuel Assaf, Roy Mauldin, Suresh Dhaniyala, and Rainer Volkamer
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2390,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2390, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).
Short summary
Performance characterization of a laminar gas inlet
Da Yang, Margarita Reza, Roy Mauldin, Rainer Volkamer, and Suresh Dhaniyala
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1463–1474, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1463-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1463-2024, 2024
Short summary
Observations of bromine monoxide transport in the Arctic sustained on aerosol particles
Peter K. Peterson, Denis Pöhler, Holger Sihler, Johannes Zielcke, Stephan General, Udo Frieß, Ulrich Platt, William R. Simpson, Son V. Nghiem, Paul B. Shepson, Brian H. Stirm, Suresh Dhaniyala, Thomas Wagner, Dana R. Caulton, Jose D. Fuentes, and Kerri A. Pratt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7567–7579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7567-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7567-2017, 2017
Short summary
Aircraft testing of the new Blunt-body Aerosol Sampler (BASE)
A. Moharreri, L. Craig, P. Dubey, D. C. Rogers, and S. Dhaniyala
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 3085–3093, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3085-2014,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3085-2014, 2014

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Validation and Intercomparisons
Classification accuracy and compatibility across devices of a new Rapid-E+ flow cytometer
Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 5051–5070, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5051-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5051-2024, 2024
Short summary
A 2-year intercomparison of three methods for measuring black carbon concentration at a high-altitude research station in Europe
Sarah Tinorua, Cyrielle Denjean, Pierre Nabat, Véronique Pont, Mathilde Arnaud, Thierry Bourrianne, Maria Dias Alves, and Eric Gardrat
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3897–3915, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3897-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3897-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comparison of the LEO and CPMA-SP2 techniques for black-carbon mixing-state measurements
Arash Naseri, Joel C. Corbin, and Jason S. Olfert
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3719–3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024, 2024
Short summary
Aerosol trace element solubility determined using ultrapure water batch leaching: an intercomparison study of four different leaching protocols
Rui Li, Prema Piyusha Panda, Yizhu Chen, Zhenming Zhu, Fu Wang, Yujiao Zhu, He Meng, Yan Ren, Ashwini Kumar, and Mingjin Tang
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3147–3156, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024, 2024
Short summary
Field comparison of dual- and single-spot Aethalometers: equivalent black carbon, light absorption, Ångström exponent and secondary brown carbon estimations
Liangbin Wu, Cheng Wu, Tao Deng, Dui Wu, Mei Li, Yong Jie Li, and Zhen Zhou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2917–2936, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Afrifa-Yamoah, E., Mueller, U. A., Taylor, S., and Fisher, A.: Missing data imputation of high-resolution temporal climate time series data, Meteorol. Appl., 27, e1873, https://doi.org/10.1002/met.1873, 2020. a
Ardon-Dryer, K., Dryer, Y., Williams, J. N., and Moghimi, N.: Measurements of PM2.5 with PurpleAir under atmospheric conditions, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5441–5458, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5441-2020, 2020. a, b, c, d, e
Bai, H., Gao, W., Zhang, Y., and Wang, L.: Assessment of health benefit of PM2.5 reduction during COVID-19 lockdown in China and separating contributions from anthropogenic emissions and meteorology, J. Environ. Sci., 115, 422–431, 2022. a, b
Barkjohn, K. K., Gantt, B., and Clements, A. L.: Development and application of a United States-wide correction for PM2.5 data collected with the PurpleAir sensor, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 4617–4637, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4617-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Bi, J., Wildani, A., Chang, H. H., and Liu, Y.: Incorporating low-cost sensor measurements into high-resolution PM2.5 modeling at a large spatial scale, Environ. Sci. Technol., 54, 2152–2162, 2020. a
Download
Short summary
Low-cost sensors are becoming increasingly important in air quality monitoring due to their affordability and ease of deployment. While low-cost sensors have the potential to democratize air quality monitoring, their use must be accompanied by careful interpretation and validation of the data. Analysis of their long-term data record clearly shows that the reported data from low-cost sensors may not be equally sensitive to all emission sources, which can complicate policy-making.