Title: A new methodology to assess the performance and uncertainty of source apportionment models II: The results of two European intercomparison exercises
Authors: BELIS CLAUDIOKARAGULIAN FEDERICOAMATO FulvioALMEIDA M.ARTAXO PauloBEDDOWS DavidBERNARDONI VeraBOVE Maria ChiaraCARBONE SamaraCESARI DanielaCONTINI DanieleCUCCIA EleonoraDIAPOULI E.ELEFTHERIADIS K.FAVEZ OlivierHADDAD ImadHARRISON RoyHOVORKA JanHELLEBUST StigJANG EunhwaKAMMERMEIER TomJORQUERA HectorKARL MatthiasLUCARELLI FrancoMOOIBROEK DennisNAVA SilviaNOJGAARD Jakob KlenoPAATERO PenttiPANDOLFI MarcoPERRONE Maria GraziaPETIT Jean EudesPIETRODANGELO AdrianaPOKORNA PetraPRATI PaoloPREVOT Andre S. H.QUASS UlrichQUEROL XavierSARAGA Dikaia E.SCIARE JeanSFETSOS A.VALLI GianluigiVECCHI RobertaVESTENIUS MikaYUBERO EduardoHOPKE Philip
Citation: ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT vol. 123 no. Part A p. 240-250
Publisher: PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
Publication Year: 2015
JRC N°: JRC91806
ISSN: 1352-2310
URI: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231015304854
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC91806
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.10.068
Type: Articles in periodicals and books
Abstract: The performance and the uncertainty of receptor models (RMs) were assessed in intercomparison exercises employing real-world and synthetic input datasets. To that end, the results obtained by different practitioners using ten different RMs were compared with a reference. In order to explain the differences in the performances and uncertainties of the different approaches, the apportioned mass, the number of sources, the chemical profiles, the contribution-to-species and the time trends of the sources were all evaluated using the methodology described in Belis et al. (2015). In this study, 87% of the 344 source contribution estimates (SCEs) reported by participants in 47 different source apportionment model results met the 50% standard uncertainty quality objective established for the performance test. In addition, 68% of the SCE uncertainties reported in the results were coherent with the analytical uncertainties in the input data. The most used models, EPA-PMF v.3, PMF2 and EPA-CMB 8.2, presented quite satisfactory performances in the estimation of SCEs while unconstrained models, that do not account for the uncertainty in the input data (e.g. APCS and FA-MLRA), showed below average performance. Sources with well-defined chemical profiles and seasonal time trends, that make appreciable contributions (>10%), were those better quantified by the models while those with contributions to the PM mass close to 1% represented a challenge. The results of the assessment indicate that RMs are capable of estimating the contribution of the major pollution source categories over a given time window with a level of accuracy that is in line with the needs of air quality management.
JRC Directorate:Sustainable Resources

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.