Journal Home
Login
Register
Open Access Journal
Submit a Paper
Propose a Special lssue
Open Access
ARTICLE
Neural Network–Driven Forecasting of Fine Particulate Air Pollution: Empirical Foundations, Methodological Evolutions, and Public Health Implications
Issue Vol. 2 No. 02 (2025): Volume 02 Issue 02 --- Section Articles
psdf
Abstract
Air pollution forecasting has emerged as one of the most critical interdisciplinary research domains at the intersection of environmental science, machine learning, and public health policy. Fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to two point five micrometers has been consistently associated with elevated morbidity, premature mortality, and systemic health degradation across global populations, positioning accurate and timely forecasting as both a scientific and ethical imperative (Brunekreef & Holgate, 2002; Apte et al., 2018). Traditional statistical approaches, including multiple linear regression and geographically weighted models, have contributed foundational insights into spatial and temporal pollution dynamics, yet they exhibit persistent limitations in capturing nonlinear, multivariate atmospheric processes (Hu et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2017). Against this backdrop, machine learning and neural network–based methodologies have increasingly been advanced as viable alternatives capable of modeling complex pollutant–meteorology interactions with improved predictive fidelity (Breiman, 2001; Chen et al., 2018).
This research article develops a comprehensive empirical and theoretical examination of neural network–based fine particulate forecasting models, grounded explicitly in prior empirical work on neural forecasting architectures presented within international engineering and smart systems research contexts (Mahajan et al., 2017; Kalapanidas & Avouris, 2017). By synthesizing insights from epidemiological literature, computational learning theory, and applied air quality modeling, this study situates neural network forecasting not merely as a technical optimization problem, but as a transformative epistemological shift in environmental risk anticipation. The article critically engages with hybrid modeling paradigms that integrate neural networks with ensemble learning approaches such as random forests, highlighting both performance gains and interpretability challenges (Liaw & Wiener, 2002; Jiang et al., 2020).
Methodologically, the study adopts a descriptive–analytical framework rather than experimental replication, enabling a deep interrogation of model rationale, assumptions, training dynamics, and generalization behavior across diverse urban and regional contexts. Particular attention is devoted to the ethical and governance dimensions of predictive air quality systems, especially in light of global health burden assessments that underscore the disproportionate impacts of air pollution on vulnerable populations, including children and older adults (Wong et al., 2004; Cao et al., 2022). The results synthesize empirical findings reported across the literature, demonstrating that neural network models consistently outperform linear and tree-based approaches under conditions of high temporal volatility and meteorological complexity, while also revealing systemic weaknesses related to data sparsity and model transparency (Mahajan et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2018).
The discussion extends these findings into a broader theoretical and policy-oriented discourse, arguing that the future of air quality forecasting lies in context-aware, hybridized machine learning systems aligned with public health decision-making frameworks. By articulating unresolved debates, methodological constraints, and future research pathways, this article contributes an integrative and critical perspective intended to guide both academic inquiry and applied environmental governance in an era of escalating atmospheric risk (WHO, 2019; Murray et al., 2020).
Keywords
References
1. Chen, T., Zhang, Y., Zhu, J., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Air quality prediction by deep learning model. Neurocomputing, 273, 155–162.
2. Wong, E. Y., Gohlke, J., Griffith, W. C., Farrow, S., & Faustman, E. M. (2004). Assessing the health benefits of air pollution reduction for children. Environmental Health Perspectives, 112, 226–232.
3. Mahajan, S., Chen, L.-J., & Tsai, T.-C. (2017). An empirical study of PM2.5 forecasting using neural network. In Proceedings of the IEEE Smart World Congress, San Francisco.
4. Liaw, A., & Wiener, M. (2002). Classification and regression by randomForest. R News, 2(3), 18–22.
5. Cao, L., Zhai, D., Kuang, M., & Xia, Y. (2022). Indoor air pollution and frailty: A cross-sectional and follow-up study among older Chinese adults. Environmental Research, 204, 112006.
6. Brunekreef, B., & Holgate, S. T. (2002). Air pollution and health. The Lancet, 360(9341), 1233–1242.
7. Zhang, X., Tang, L., Luo, L., & Liang, J. (2017). A hybrid air quality early-warning system based on machine learning and multiple linear regression. Atmospheric Environment, 166, 98–105.
8. Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5–32.
9. Agarwal, N., Meena, C. S., Raj, B. P., Saini, L., Kumar, A., Gopalakrishnan, N., et al. (2021). Indoor air quality improvement in COVID-19 pandemic: Review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 70, 102942.
10. Hu, X., Waller, L. A., & Wang, Y. (2017). Estimating ground-level PM2.5 concentrations in the southeastern U.S. using geographically weighted regression. Environmental Research, 156, 283–290.
11. Apte, J. S., Brauer, M., Cohen, A. J., Ezzati, M., & Pope, C. A. (2018). Ambient PM2.5 reduces global and regional life expectancy. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 5, 546–551.
12. Kalapanidas, E., & Avouris, N. (2017). Applying machine learning techniques in air quality prediction. In Proceedings of the ACAI Conference, 99.
13. Jiang, Y., Bai, Y., Yang, C., & Tang, T. (2020). A hybrid model for short-term air quality prediction. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 11(1), 218–229.
14. Murray, C. J. L., Aravkin, A. Y., Zheng, P., Abbafati, C., Abbas, K. M., Abbasi-Kangevari, M., et al. (2020). Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019. The Lancet, 396, 1223–1249.
15. Lee, B.-J., Kim, B., & Lee, K. (2014). Air pollution exposure and cardiovascular disease. Toxicological Research, 30, 71–75.
16. World Health Organization. (2019). Ten threats to global health in 2019.
