Fine particulate matter source apportionment using a hybrid chemical transport and receptor model approach

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Volumn 14, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 5415-5431

  Hu, Y ^a   Balachandran, S ^a   Pachon, J E ^a,b   Baek, J ^a,c   Ivey, C ^a   Holmes, H ^a   Odman, M T ^a   Mulholland, J A ^a   Russell, A G ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA SALLE   (Colombia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARTICULATE MATTER; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SPECIATION (CHEMISTRY);

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84901820136     PISSN: 16807316     EISSN: 16807324     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5194/acp-14-5415-2014     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Appel, K. W., Bhave, P. V., Gilliland, A. B., Sarwar, G., and Roselle, S. J.: Evaluation of the community multiscale air quality (CMAQ) model version 4.5: Sensitivities impacting model performance; Part II - particulate matter, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6057-6066, 2008.
2. Appel, K. W., Pouliot, G. A., Simon, H., Sarwar, G., Pye, H. O. T., Napelenok, S. L., Akhtar, F., and Roselle, S. J.: Evaluation of dust and trace metal estimates from the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 5.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 883-899, doi:10.5194/gmd-6-883-2013, 2013.
3. Baek, J.: Improving aerosol simulations: Assessing and improving emissions and secondary organic aerosol formation in air quality modeling, 140 pp., Georgia Institute of Tecnology, Atlanta, GA, Ph.D. Dissertation, 2009.
4. Balachandran, S., Pachon, J. E., Hu, Y., Lee, D., Mulholland, J. A., and Russell, A. G.: Ensemble-trained source apportionment of fine particulate matter and method uncertainty analysis, Atmos. Environ., 61, 387-394, 2012.
5. Binkowski, F. S. and Roselle, S. J.: Models-3 Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) model aerosol component: 1. Model description, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4183, doi:10.1029/2001JD001409, 2003.
6. Blanchard, C. L., Tanenbaum, S., and Hidy, G. M.: Source Contributions to Atmospheric Gases and Particulate Matter in the Southeastern United States, Environ. Sci. Technol., 46, 5479-5488, 2012.
7. Boylan, J. W. and Russell, A. G.: PM and light extinction model performance metrics, goals, and criteria for three-dimensional air quality models, Atmos. Environ., 40, 4946-4959, 2006. (Pubitemid 44088472)
8. Boylan, J.W., Odman, M. T.,Wilkinson, J. G., Russell, A. G., Doty, K. G., Norris,W. B., and McNider, R. T.: Development of a comprehensive, multiscale "one-atmosphere" modeling system: application to the Southern Appalachian Mountains, Atmos. Environ., 36, 3721-3734, 2002.
9. Boylan, J. W., Odman, M. T., Wilkinson, J. G., and Russell, A. G.: Integrated assessment modeling of atmospheric pollutants in the Southern Appalachian Mountains: Part II - PM2.5 and visibility, J. Air Waste Manage., 56, 12-22, 2006. (Pubitemid 43733615)
10. Bullock, K. R., Duvall, R. M., Norris, G. A., McDow, S. R., and Hays, M. D.: Evaluation of the CMB and PMF models using organic molecular markers in fine particulate matter collected during the Pittsburgh Air Quality Study, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6897-6904, 2008.
11. Burr, M. J. and Zhang, Y.: Source apportionment of fine particulate matter over the Eastern U.S. Part II: source apportionment simulations using CAMx/PSAT and comparisons with CMAQ source sensitivity simulations, Atmospheric Pollution Research, 2, 318-336, doi:10.5094/APR.2011.037, 2011a.
12. Burr, M. J. and Zhang, Y.: Source apportionment of fine particulate matter over the Eastern U.S. Part I: source sensitivity simulations using CMAQ with the Brute Force method, Atmospheric Pollution Research, 2, 300-317, doi:10.5094/APR.2011.036, 2011b.
13. Byun, D. and Schere, K. L.: Review of the Governing Equations, Computational Algorithms, and Other Components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System, Appl. Mech. Rev., 59, 51-77, 2006.
14. Carter,W. P. L.: Documentation of the SAPRC-99 Chemical Mechanism for VOC Reactivity Assessment, Contract No. 92-329 and 95-308, California Air Resources Board, 2000.
15. CEP: Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions Modeling System (SMOKE) User Manual, Carolina Environmental Program - The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 2003.
16. Chang, W. L., Bhave, P. V., Brown, S. S., Riemer, N., Stutz, J., and Dabdub, D.: Heterogeneous Atmospheric Chemistry, Ambient Measurements, and Model Calculations of N2O5: A Review, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 45, 665-695, 2011.
17. Chen, L.W. A.,Watson, J. G., Chow, J. C., DuBois, D.W., and Herschberger, L.: Chemical mass balance source apportionment for combined PM2.5 measurements from U.S. non-urban and urban long-term networks, Atmos. Environ., 44, 4908-4918, 2010.
18. Chen, L.W. A.,Watson, J. G., Chow, J. C., DuBois, D.W., and Herschberger, L.: PM2.5 Source Apportionment: Reconciling Receptor Models for US Nonurban and Urban Long-Term Networks, J. Air Waste Manage., 61, 1204-1217, 2011.
19. Chow, J. C., Watson, J. G., Lowenthal, D. H., Solomon, P. A., Magliano, K. L., Ziman, S. D., and Richards, L.W.: PM10 Source Apportionment in California San-Joaquin Valley, Atmos. Environ. A-Gen., 26, 3335-3354, 1992.
20. Chow, J. C., Watson, J. G., Lowenthal, D. H., Chen, L. W. A., Zielinska, B., Mazzoleni, L. R., and Magliano, K. L.: Evaluation of organic markers for chemical mass balance source apportionment at the Fresno Supersite, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 1741-1754, doi:10.5194/acp-7-1741-2007, 2007. (Pubitemid 46572784)
21. Cohan, D. S., Hakami, A., Hu, Y., and Russell, A. G.: Nonlinear response of ozone to emissions: source apportionment and sensitivity analysis, Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 6739-6748, 2005.
22. Cooper, J. A. and Watson, J. G.: Reseptor Oriented Methods of Air Particulate Source Apportionment, JAPCA J. Air Waste Ma., 30, 1116-1125, 1980. (Pubitemid 11241665)
23. Coutant, B. W., Holloman, C. H., Swinton, K. E., and Hafner, H. R.: Eight-Site Source Apportionment of PM2.5 Speciation Trend Data, EPA Contract No. 68-D-02-061, Work Assignment 1-05, 2003.
24. Dockery, D. W., Pope, C. A., Xu, X., Spengler, J. D., Ware, J. H., Fay, M. E., Ferris, B. G., and Speizer, F. E.: An Association between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities, The New England Journal of Medicine, 329, 24, 1753-1759, 1993. (Pubitemid 23355547)
25. Doraiswamy, P., Davis, W. T., Miller, T. L., and Fu, J. S.: Source apportionment of fine particles in Tennessee using a sourceoriented model, J. Air Waste Manage., 57, 407-419, 2007. (Pubitemid 46663232)
26. Dunker, A. M.: Efficient Calculation of Sensitivity Coefficients for Complex Atmospheric Models, Atmos. Environ., 15, 1155-1161, 1981.
27. Dunker, A. M.: The Decoupled Direct Method for Calculating Sensitivity Coefficients in Chemical-Kinetics, J. Chem. Phys., 81, 2385-2393, 1984.
28. Dunker, A. M., Yarwood, G., Ortmann, J. P., and Wilson, G. M.: Comparison of source apportionment and source sensitivity of ozone in a three-dimensional air quality model, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 2953-2964, 2002. (Pubitemid 34747295)
29. Emery, C., Tai, E., and Yarwood, G.: Enhanced meteorological modeling and performance evaluation for two Texas ozone episodes, Prepared for the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commissions, ENVIRON International Corporation, Novato, CA, 2001.
30. Gildemeister, A. E., Hopke, P. K., and Kim, E.: Sources of fine urban particulate matter in Detroit, MI, Chemosphere, 69, 1064-1074, 2007. (Pubitemid 47429731)
31. Grell, G., Dudhia, J., and Stauffer, D.: A description of the Fifth-Generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5), NCAR/TN 398+STR, NCAR Technical Note: NCAR/TN- 398+STR, 1994.
32. Hakami, A., Odman, M. T., and Russell, A. G.: Nonlinearity in atmospheric response: A direct sensitivity analysis approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D15303, doi:10.1029/2003JD004502, 2004. (Pubitemid 39408310)
33. Hanna, S., Chang, J., and Fernau, M.: Monte Carlo estimates of uncertainties in predictions by a photochemical grid model (UAMIV) due to uncertainties in input variables, Atmos. Environ., 32, 3619-3628, 1998. (Pubitemid 28448595)
34. Hanna, S. R. and Yang, R.: Evaluations of mesoscale models' simulations of near-surface winds, temperature gradients, and mixing depths, J. Appl. Meteorol., 40, 1095-1104, 2001. (Pubitemid 32668069)
35. Hanna, S. R., Lu, Z., Frey, H. C., Wheeler, N., Vukovich, J., Arumachalam, S., and Fernau, M. E.: Uncertainties in predicted ozone concentration due to input uncertainties for the UAM-V photochemical grid model applied to the July 1995 OTAG domain, Atmos. Environ., 35, 891-903, 2001. (Pubitemid 32170381)
36. Hanna, S. R., Russell, A. G., Wilkinson, J., Vukovich, J., and Hansen, D. A.: Monte Carlo estimation of uncertainties in BEIS3 emission outputs and their effects on uncertainties in Chemical Transport Model predictions, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D01302, doi:10.01029/2004JD004986, 2005.
37. Held, T., Ying, Q., Kleeman, M. J., Schauer, J. J., and Fraser, M. P.: A comparison of the UCD/CIT air quality model and the CMB source-receptor model for primary airborne particulate matter, Atmos. Environ., 39, 2281-2297, 2005.
38. Henze, D. K., Seinfeld, J. H., and Shindell, D. T.: Inverse modeling and mapping US air quality influences of inorganic PM2.5 precursor emissions using the adjoint of GEOS-Chem, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5877-5903, doi:10.5194/acp-9- 5877-2009, 2009.
39. Herndon, S. C., Jayne, J. T., Lobo, P., Onasch, T. B., Fleming, G., Hagen, D. E., Whitefield, P. D., and Miake-Lye, R. C.: Commercial aircraft engine emissions characterization of in-use aircraft at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 1877-1883, 2008. (Pubitemid 351497674)
40. Hu, Y., Odman, M. T., and Russell, A. G.: Mass conservation in the Community Multiscale Air Quality model, Atmos. Environ., 40, 1199-1204, 2006. (Pubitemid 43120744)
41. Kleeman, M. J., Ying, Q., Lu, J., Mysliwiec, M. J., Griffin, R. J., Chen, J. J., and Clegg, S.: Source apportionment of secondary organic aerosol during a severe photochemical smog episode, Atmos. Environ., 41, 576-591, 2007. (Pubitemid 44920414)
42. Koo, B.,Wilson, G. M., Morris, R. E., Dunker, A. M., and Yarwood, G.: Comparison of Source Apportionment and Sensitivity Analysis in a Particulate Matter Air Quality Model, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 6669-6675, 2009.
43. Kraft, D.: A software package for sequential quadratic programming, Technical Report DFVLR-FB 88-28, Institut für Dynamik der Flugsysteme, Oberpfaffenhofen, July, 1988.
44. Kraft, D.: Algorithm 733: TOMP-Fortran modules for optimal control calculations, ACM T. Math. Software, 20, 262-281, 1994.
45. Kwok, R. H. F., Napelenok, S. L., and Baker, K. R.: Implementation and evaluation of PM2.5 source contribution analysis in a photochemical model, Atmos. Environ., 80, 398-407, 2013
46. Laupsa, H., Denby, B., Larssen, S., and Schaug, J.: Source apportionment of particulate matter (PM2.5) in an urban area using dispersion, receptor and inverse modelling, Atmos. Environ., 43, 4733-4744, 2009.
47. Lee, B. H.,Wood, E. C.,Miake-Lye, R. C., Herndon, S. C., Munger, J. W., and Wofsy, S. C.: Reactive Chemistry in Aircraft Exhaust Implications for Air Quality, Transp. Res. Record, 2206, 19-23, 2011.
48. Lee, D., Balachandran, S., Pachon, J., Shankaran, R., Lee, S., Mulholland, J. A., and Russell, A. G.: Ensemble-Trained PM2.5 Source Apportionment Approach for Health Studies, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 7023-7031, 2009.
49. Lee, S. and Russell, A. G.: Estimating uncertainties and uncertainty contributors of CMB PM2.5 source apportionment results, Atmos. Environ., 41, 9616-9624, 2007. (Pubitemid 350161345)
50. Lee, S., Liu, W., Wang, Y. H., Russell, A. G., and Edgerton, E. S.: Source apportionment of PM2.5: Comparing PMF and CMB results for four ambient monitoriniz sites in the southeastern United States, Atmos. Environ., 42, 4126-4137, 2008.
51. Lin, C. and Milford, J. B.: Decay-Adjusted Chemical Mass-Balance Receptor Modeling for Volatile Organic-Compounds, Atmos. Environ., 28, 3261-3276, 1994.
52. Liu, D. C. and Nocedal, J.: On the Limited Memory Method for Large Scale Optimization, Mathematical Programming B, 45, 503-528, 1989. (Pubitemid 20660315)
53. Liu, W., Wang, Y. H., Russell, A., and Edgerton, E. S.: Enhanced source identification of southeast aerosols using temperatureresolved carbon fractions and gas phase components, Atmos. Environ., 40, S445-S466, 2006.
54. Lowenthal, D. H., Watson, J. G., Koracin, D., Chen, L. W. A., Dubois, D., Vellore, R., Kumar, N., Knipping, E. M., Wheeler, N., Craig, K., and Reid, S.: Evaluation of Regional-Scale Receptor Modeling, J. Air Waste Manage., 60, 26-42, 2010.
55. Malm, W. C., Schichtel, B. A., and Pitchford, M. L.: Uncertainties in PM2.5 gravimetric and speciation measurements and what we can learn from them, J. Air Waste Manage., 61, 1131-1149, 2011.
56. Maranche, J.: Allegheny County PM2.5 Source Apportionment Results using the Positive Matrix Factorization Model, Allegheny County Health Department, Pittsburgh, PA (http://www.achd.net/airqual/pubs/pdf/pmf0106.pdf), 2006.
57. Marmur, A., Unal, A., Mulholland, J. A., and Russell, A. G.: Optimization-based source apportionment of PM2.5 incorporating gas-to-particle ratios, Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 3245-3254, 2005.
58. Marmur, A., Park, S. K., Mulholland, J. A., Tolbert, P. E., and Russell, A. G.: Source apportionment of PM2.5 in the southeastern United States using receptor and emissions-based models: Conceptual differences and implications for time-series health studies, Atmos. Environ., 40, 2533-2551, 2006.
59. Marmur, A., Mulholland, J. A., and Russell, A. G.: Optimized variable source-profile approach for source apportionment, Atmos. Environ., 41, 493-505, 2007. (Pubitemid 44909796)
60. Martello, D. V., Pekney, N. J., Anderson, R. R., Davidson, C. I., Hopke, P. K., Kim, E., Christensen, W. F., Mangelson, N. F., and Eatough, D. J.: Apportionment of ambient primary and secondary fine particulate matter at the Pittsburgh National Energy Laboratory particulate matter characterization site using positive matrix factorization and a potential source contributions function analysis, J. Air Waste Manage., 58, 357-368, 2008. (Pubitemid 351462978)
61. Martin, D., Petersson, K. F., and Shallcross, D. E.: The use of cyclic perfluoroalkanes and SF6 in atmospheric dispersion experiments, Q. J. Ror. Meteor. Soc., 137, 2047-2063, 2011.
62. Napelenok, S. L., Cohan, D., Hu, Y., and Russell, A. G.: Decoupled Direct 3D Sensitivity Analysis For Particulate Matter (DDM- 3D/PM), Atmos. Environ., 40, 6112-6121, 2006. (Pubitemid 44302323)
63. Nocedal, J.: Updating Quasi-Newton Matrices with Limited Storage, Math. Comput., 35, 773-782, 1980.
64. Pattero, P. and Tapper, U.: Positive Matrix Factorization - a Nonnegative Factor Model with Optimal Utilization of Error- Estimates of Data Values, Environmetrics, 5, 111-126, 1994.
65. Pham, T.-L., Kim, B. M., Katzenstein, A., and Goss, T.: PM2.5 Source Apportionment for the South Coast Air Basin Using Chemical Mass Balance Receptor Model, MATES III Final Report, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/prdas/ matesIII/Final/Appendices/g-MATESIIIAppendixVIIFinal92008.pdf (last access: 16 May 2013), 2008.
66. Pleim, J. E. and Xiu, A.: Development and testing of a surface flux and planetary boundary layer model with explicit soil moisture parameterization for application in mesoscale models, J. Appl. Meteorol., 34, 16-32, 1995.
67. Reff, A., Eberly, S. I., and Bhave, P. V.: Receptor modeling of ambient particulate matter data using positive matrix factorization: Review of existing methods, J. AirWaste Manage., 57, 146-154, 2007. (Pubitemid 46668264)
68. Reff, A., Bhave, P. V., Simon, H., Pace, T. G., Pouliot, G. A., Mobley, J. D., and Houyoux, M.: Emissions Inventory of PM2.5 Trace Elements across the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 5790-5796, 2009.
69. Rizzo, M. J., and Scheff, P. A.: Fine particulate source apportionment using data from the USEPA speciation trends network in Chicago, Illinois: Comparison of two source apportionment models, Atmos. Environ., 41, 6276-6288, 2007. (Pubitemid 47268187)
70. Roy, A. A., Wagstrom, K. M., Adams, P. J., Pandis, S. N., and Robinson, A. L.: Quantification of the effects of molecular marker oxidation on source apportionment estimates for motor vehicles, Atmos. Environ., 45, 3132-3140, 2011.
71. Russell, A. G.: EPA Supersites Program-related emissions-based particulate matter modeling: Initial applications and advances, J. Air Waste Manage., 58, 289-302, 2008. (Pubitemid 351397519)
72. Schauer, J. J., Rogge, W. F., Hildemann, L. M., Mazurek, M. A., and Cass, G. R.: Source apportionment of airborne particulate matter using organic compounds as tracers, Atmos. Environ., 30, 3837-3855, 1996.
73. Schichtel, B. A., Malm, W. C., Gebhart, K. A., Barna, M. G., and Knipping, E. M.: A hybrid source apportionment model integrating measured data and air quality model results, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D07301, doi:10.1029/2005JD006238, 2006.
74. Sheesley, R. J., Schauer, J. J., Zheng, M., and Wang, B.: Sensitivity of molecular marker-based CMB models to biomass burning source profiles, Atmos. Environ., 41, 9050-9063, 2007.
75. Shi, G. L., Li, X., Feng, Y. C., Wang, Y. Q., Wu, J. H., Li, J., and Zhu, T.: Combined source apportionment, using positive matrix factorization-chemical mass balance and principal component analysis/multiple linear regression-chemical mass balance models, Atmos. Environ., 43, 2929-2937, 2009.
76. Simon, H., Beck, L., Bhave, P. V., Divita, F., Hsu, Y., Luecken, D., Mobley, J. D., Pouliot, G. A., Reff, A., Sarwar, G., and Strum, M.: The development and uses of EPA's SPECIATE database, Atmospheric Pollution Research, 1, 196-206, 2010.
77. Simon, H., Baker, K. R., and Phillips, S.: Compilation and interpretation of photochemical model performance statistics published between 2006 and 2012, Atmos. Environ., 61, 124-139, 2012.
78. Subramanian, R., Donahue, N. M., Bernardo-Bricker, A., Rogge, W. F., and Robinson, A. L.: Contribution of motor vehicle emissions to organic carbon and fine particle mass in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Effects of varying source profiles and seasonal trends in ambient marker concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 40, 8002-8019, 2006. (Pubitemid 44750776)
79. Subramanian, R., Donahue, N. M., Bernardo-Bricker, A., Rogge, W. F., and Robinson, A. L.: Insights into the primary-secondary and regional-local contributions to organic aerosol and PM2.5 mass in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Atmos. Environ., 41, 7414-7433, 2007. (Pubitemid 350052650)
80. Swietlicki, E., Puri, S., Hansson, H. C., and Edner, H.: Urban air pollution source apportionment using a combination of aerosol and gas monitoring techniques, Atmos. Environ., 30, 2795-2809, 1996.
81. Tesche, T. W., Morris, R., Tonnesen, G., McNally, D., Boylan, J., and Brewer, P.: CMAQ/CAMx annual 2002 performance evaluation over the eastern US, Atmos. Environ., 40, 4906-4919, 2006. (Pubitemid 44102711)
82. Thurston, G. D., Ito, K., and Lall, R.: A source apportionment of U.S. fine particulate matter air pollution, Atmos. Environ., 45, 3924-3936, 2011.
83. Tian, D., Hu, Y., Wang, Y., Boylan, J., Zheng, M., and Russell, A. G.: Assessment of Biomass Burning Emissions and Their Impacts on Urban and Regional PM2.5: A Georgia Case Study, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 299-305, doi:210.1021/es801827s, 2009.
84. Unal, A., Hu, Y. T., Chang, M. E., Odman, M. T., and Russell, A. G.: Airport related emissions and impacts on air quality: Application to the Atlanta International Airport, Atmos. Environ., 39, 5787-5798, 2005.
85. USEPA: Protocol for Applying and Validating the CMB Model for PM2.5 and VOC, Report Number EPA-451/R-04-001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2004.
86. Viana, M., Pandolfi, M., Minguillon, M. C., Querol, X., Alastuey, A., Monfort, E., and Celades, I.: Inter-comparison of receptor models for PM source apportionment: Case study in an industrial area, Atmos. Environ., 42, 3820-3832, 2008a.
87. Viana, M., Kuhlbusch, T. A. J., Querol, X., Alastuey, A., Harrison, R. M., Hopke, P. K., Winiwarter, W., Vallius, A., Szidat, S., Prevot, A. S. H., Hueglin, C., Bloemen, H., Wahlin, P., Vecchi, R., Miranda, A. I., Kasper-Giebl, A., Maenhaut, W., and Hitzenberger, R.: Source apportionment of particulate matter in Europe: A review of methods and results, J. Aerosol Sci., 39, 827-849, 2008b.
88. Wagstrom, K. M., Pandis, S. N., Yarwood, G., Wilson, G. M., and Morris, R. E.: Development and application of a computationally efficient particulate matter apportionment algorithm in a three-dimensional chemical transport model, Atmos. Environ., 42, 5650-5659, 2008.
89. Wang, Z. S., Chien, C. J., and Tonnesen, G. S.: Development of a tagged species source apportionment algorithm to characterize three-dimensional transport and transformation of precursors and secondary pollutants, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D21206, doi:10.1029/2008JD010846, 2009.
90. Watson, J. G.: Overview of Receptor Model Principles, J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 34, 619-623, 1984. (Pubitemid 14124300)
91. Watson, J. G., Cooper, J. A., and Huntzicker, J. J.: The Effective Variance Weighting for Least-Squares Calculations Applied to the Mass Balance Receptor Model, Atmos. Environ., 18, 1347-1355, 1984. (Pubitemid 14008177)
92. Watson, J. G., Chen, L. W. A., Chow, J. C., Doraiswamy, P., and Lowenthal, D. H.: Source apportionment: Findings from the US Supersites program, J. Air Waste Manage., 58, 265-288, 2008. (Pubitemid 351397518)
93. Watson, J. G., Chow, J. C., Lowenthal, D. H., Robinson, N. F., Cahill, C. F., and Blumenthal, D. L.: Simulating changes in source profiles from coal-fired power stations: Use in chemical mass balance of PM2.5 in the Mount Zirkel Wilderness, Energy & Fuels, 16, 311-324, 2002. (Pubitemid 34554678)
94. Wittig, A. E. and Allen, D. T.: Improvement of the Chemical Mass Balance model for apportioning - sources of non-methane hydrocarbons using composite aged source profiles, Atmos. Environ., 42, 1319-1337, 2008.
95. Xie, M. J., Piedrahita, R., Dutton, S. J., Milford, J. B., Hemann, J. G., Peel, J. L., Miller, S. L., Kim, S. Y., Vedal, S., Sheppard, L., and Hannigan, M. P.: Positive matrix factorization of a 32- month series of daily PM2.5 speciation data with incorporation of temperature stratification, Atmos. Environ., 65, 11-20, 2013.
96. Xiu, A. and Pleim, J. E.: Development and application of a landsurface model. I: Application in a mesoscale meteorology model, J. Appl. Meteorol., 40, 192-209, 2001. (Pubitemid 32282101)
97. Yang, Y.-J., Wilkinson, J., and Russell, A. G.: Fast, direct sensitivity analysis of multidimensional photochemical models, Environ. Sci. Technol. 31, 2859-2868, 1997. (Pubitemid 27426120)
98. Ying, Q., Lu, J., Kaduwela, A., and Kleeman, M.: Modeling air quality during the California Regional PM10/PM2.5 Air Quality Study (CPRAQS) using the UCD/CIT Source Oriented Air Quality Model - Part II. Regional source apportionment of primary airborne particulate matter, Atmos. Environ., 42, 8967-8978, 2008.
99. Zhang, W., Capps, S. L., Hu, Y., Nenes, A., Napelenok, S. L., and Russell, A. G.: Development of the high-order decoupled direct method in three dimensions for particulate matter: enabling advanced sensitivity analysis in air quality models, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 355-368, doi:10.5194/gmd-5-355-2012, 2012.
100. Zheng, M., Cass, G. R., Schauer, J. J., and Edgerton, E. S.: Source apportionment of PM2.5 in the southeastern United States using solvent-extractable organic compounds as tracers, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 2361-2371, 2002. (Pubitemid 34595174)