Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Machine-learning analysis demonstrates that geographic coordinates drive PM2.5 predictions over weather across climate zones, indicating permanent emission sources dominate pollution patterns.
Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is a major environmental concern, yet pollution assessment models are rarely tested across fundamentally different climate regimes. We develop a climate-stratified machine-learning framework using 49,997 monthly MERRA-2 satellite-assimilated samples (2019-2023) across five latitude-band climate zones, evaluated through Leave-One-Climate-Out (LOCO) cross-validation with nested hyperparameter tuning to prevent data leakage. Tuned LightGBM achieves a global LOCO R2 = 0.367 (MAE =6.43 μg m-3), but predictability varies substantially by zone: subtropical regions reach R2 = 0.604, while tropical regions achieve only R2 = 0.142, reflecting fundamental climate-dependent limits on meteorology-only models. SHAP analysis shows geographic coordinates-acting as proxies for emission patterns and climatological transport pathways-account for 64% of predictive importance on average across zones, compared to 23% for meteorological variables, indicating that PM2.5 spatial structure is driven more by where emissions occur than by month-to-month weather variability. To verify that coordinates add genuine predictive value beyond spatial autocorrelation, a retrain ablation confirms that removing latitude and longitude collapses model performance across all zones (mean R2 drops from 0.367 to -0.099), while an IDW spatial baseline confirms that the ML model captures meteorological signal beyond simple proximity interpolation (+98% R2 improvement over IDW). Temporal validation (2019-2021 training, 2022-2023 testing) yields R2 = 0.544, confirming LOCO is the more demanding test. Ensemble stacking degrades performance relative to the zone-tuned model, providing evidence of feature-set saturation rather than model weakness. This reproducible, open-source framework offers a useful benchmark for reanalysis-based PM2.5 assessment, particularly in data-sparse regions where ground monitoring is limited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Utsho et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: