Journals / Atmospheric Pollution Research / 2018 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6

A secondary-decomposition-ensemble learning paradigm for forecasting PM2.5 concentration

Pages
989–999
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our empirical results show that this method outperforms the benchmark methods in both level and directional forecasting accuracy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:To design high-accuracy tools for hourly PM2.5 concentration forecasting, we propose a new method based on the secondary-decomposition-ensemble learning paradigm.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Prior to forecasting, the original PM2.5 concentration series are processed using secondary-decomposition (SD): (1) wavelet packet decomposition (WPD) is used to decompose the time series into low-frequency components and high-frequency components; (2) the high-frequency components are further decomposed by the complementary ensemble empirical mode decomposition (CEEMD) algorithm.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our empirical results show that this method outperforms the benchmark methods in both level and directional forecasting accuracy.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

To design high-accuracy tools for hourly PM2.5 concentration forecasting, we propose a new method based on the secondary-decomposition-ensemble learning paradigm. Prior to forecasting, the original PM2.5 concentration series are processed using secondary-decomposition (SD): (1) wavelet packet decomposition (WPD) is used to decompose the time series into low-frequency components and high-frequency components; (2) the high-frequency components are further decomposed by the complementary ensemble empirical mode decomposition (CEEMD) algorithm. Then Phase space reconstruction (PSR) is utilized to determine the optimal input form of each intrinsic mode function (IMF). The least square support vector regression (LSSVR) model, optimized by the chaotic particle swarm optimization method combined with the gravitation search algorithm (CPSOGSA), is employed to model all reconstructed components independently. Finally, the predict results of these components are integrated into an aggregated output as the final prediction, utilizing another LSSVR optimized by CPSOGSA as an ensemble forecasting tool. Our empirical results show that this method outperforms the benchmark methods in both level and directional forecasting accuracy.

🔖

Cite This Article

GAN, K., SUN, S., WANG, S., WEİ, Y. (2018). A secondary-decomposition-ensemble learning paradigm for forecasting PM2.5 concentration. Atmospheric Pollution Research, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6, 989–999. https://ajindex.com/articles/210403

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Aldabe, J., Elustondo, D., Santamaría, C., Lasheras, E., Pandolfi, M., Alastuey, A., Querol, X., Santamaría, J.M., 2011. Chemical characterisation and source apportionment of PM2.5 and PM10 at rural, urban and traffic sites in Navarra (North of Spain). Atmos. Res. 102, 191–205. Antanasijević, D.Z., Pocajt, V.V., Povrenović, D.S., Ristić, M.Đ., Perić-Grujić, A.A., 2013. PM10 emission forecasting using artificial neural networks and genetic algorithm input variable optimization. Sci. Total. Environ. 443, 511–519.
  2. Biancofiore, F., Busilacchio, M., Verdecchia, M., Tomassetti, B., Aruffo, E., Bianco, S., Tommaso, S.D., Colangeli, C., Rosatelli, G., Carloda, P.D., 2017. Recursive neural network model for analysis and forecast of PM10 and PM2.5. Atmos. Res. 8, 652–659.
  3. Cobourn, W.G., 2010. An enhanced PM2.5 air quality forecast model based on nonlinear regression and back-trajectory concentrations. Atmos. Environ. 44, 3015–3023.
  4. Dai, W., Gao, J.Q., Cao, G., Ouyang, F., 2013. Chemical composition and source identification of PM2.5 in the suburb of Shenzhen, China. Atmos. Res. 122, 391–400.
  5. Diebold, F.X., Mariano, R.S., 1995. Comparing predictive accuracy. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 13, 253–263. EPA The National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution. http://www.epa. gov/air/particlepollution/2012/fshealth.pdf. Fang, C.L., Liu, H.M., Li, G.D., Sun, D.Q., Miao, Z., 2015. Estimating the impact of urbanization on air quality in China using spatial regression models. Sustainability 7, 15570–15592.
  6. Fischer, G., 1977. Convergent validation of decomposed multi-attribute utility assessment procedures for risky and riskless decisions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 18, 295–315.
  7. He, H.D., Lu, W.Z., Xue, Y., 2014. Prediction of particulate matter at street level using artificial neural networks coupling with chaotic particle swarm optimization algorithm. Build. Environ. 78, 111–117.
  8. Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R.C., 1995. Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, vol. 4. pp. 1942–1948.
  9. Konovalov, I.B., Beekmann, M., Meleux, F., Dutot, A., Foret, G., 2009. Combining deterministic and statistical approaches for PM10 forecasting in Europe. Atmos. Environ. 43, 6425–6434.
  10. Lewis, C., 1982. International and Business Forecasting Methods. Butter-Worths, London. Liang, C.S., Duan, F.K., He, K.B., Ma, Y.L., 2016. Review on recent progress in observations, source identifications and countermeasures of PM2.5. Environ. Int. 86, 150–17