2001
DOI: 10.1080/10473289.2001.10464342
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ozone Predictions in Atlanta, Georgia: Analysis of the 1999 Ozone Season

Abstract: Ozone prediction has become an important activity in many U.S. ozone nonattainment areas. In this study, we (1) the team correctly predicted next-day peak ozone concentrations 84% of the time, (2) the two linear regression models had a better performance than a 3-dimensional air quality model, (3) persistence was a strong predictor of ozone concentrations with a performance of 78%, and (4) about half of the team's wrong predictions could be prevented with improved meteorological predictions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In parallel with the development of remote‐sensed global observation of tropospheric content, various chemistry transport models (CTMs) have been developed over the last 20 years in order to understand and forecast air pollution. These CTMs cover different spatial scales ranging from continental (for example, for Europe [ Zlateve et al , 1992; Builtjes , 1992; Hass et al , 1997; Schmidt et al , 2001; Simpson et al , 2003]) to urban (for example, for Los Angeles [ Lu et al , 1997a, 1997b]; for Milan [ Silibello et al , 1998]; for Atlanta [ Cardelino et al , 2001]; for Paris [ Vautard et al , 2001]). These models require accurate input data, but most of these (emissions, initial and boundary conditions, meteorology) remain uncertain (several references about uncertainties may be found in the work of Beekmann and Derognat [2003]).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In parallel with the development of remote‐sensed global observation of tropospheric content, various chemistry transport models (CTMs) have been developed over the last 20 years in order to understand and forecast air pollution. These CTMs cover different spatial scales ranging from continental (for example, for Europe [ Zlateve et al , 1992; Builtjes , 1992; Hass et al , 1997; Schmidt et al , 2001; Simpson et al , 2003]) to urban (for example, for Los Angeles [ Lu et al , 1997a, 1997b]; for Milan [ Silibello et al , 1998]; for Atlanta [ Cardelino et al , 2001]; for Paris [ Vautard et al , 2001]). These models require accurate input data, but most of these (emissions, initial and boundary conditions, meteorology) remain uncertain (several references about uncertainties may be found in the work of Beekmann and Derognat [2003]).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several chemistry‐transport models (CTMs) have been developed in order to better understand the laws driving the chemistry and transport of air pollutants and to forecast exceedances of their information and alert thresholds. Such models cover spatial scales from regional (e.g., for Los Angeles, Lu et al [1997a, 1997b]; for Atlanta, Cardelino et al [2001]; for Milan, Silibello et al [1998]; and for Paris, Vautard et al [2001]) to continental (for Europe, Schmidt et al [2001], Hass et al [1997], and Mosca et al [1998]). They require an array of variables as input data (emissions, initial and boundary conditions, meteorology…) that are in most cases quite uncertain and, in some, difficult to collect in real time.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First of all, neural networks are the most frequently used to produce forecasts of PM 10 concentration (Paschalidou et al 2011;Carnevale et al 2011;Kukkonen et al 2003). Therefore, multiple linear regression modeling is frequently used as in the studies of Stadlober et al (2008), Cordelino et al (2001) and Paschalidou et al (2009). Moreover, Chaloulakou et al (2003) and Grivas and Chaloulakou (2006) compared the performance of neural networks and multiple regression model to forecast the daily average of PM 10 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%