Geoscientific Model Development
Geoscientific Model Development
GMD
Articles | Volume 10, issue 4
Articles | Volume 10, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1767-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1767-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Articles | Volume 10, issue 4
Model evaluation paper
 | 
27 Apr 2017
Model evaluation paper |  | 27 Apr 2017

Spatiotemporal evaluation of EMEP4UK-WRF v4.3 atmospheric chemistry transport simulations of health-related metrics for NO2, O3, PM10, and PM2. 5 for 2001–2010

Chun Lin, Mathew R. Heal, Massimo Vieno, Ian A. MacKenzie, Ben G. Armstrong, Barbara K. Butland, Ai Milojevic, Zaid Chalabi, Richard W. Atkinson, David S. Stevenson, Ruth M. Doherty, and Paul Wilkinson

Viewed

Total article views: 4,258 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
2,964 1,126 168 4,258 499 197 260
  • HTML: 2,964
  • PDF: 1,126
  • XML: 168
  • Total: 4,258
  • Supplement: 499
  • BibTeX: 197
  • EndNote: 260
Views and downloads (calculated since 15 Aug 2016)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 15 Aug 2016)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 4,258 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 4,075 with geography defined and 183 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 08 Nov 2025
Download
Short summary
We evaluated EMEP4UK-WRF v4.3 atmospheric chemistry transport simulations at 5 km horizontal resolution over the UK for use in air pollution epidemiology and health burden assessment. Model-measurement comparison focused on daily and annual means for NO2, O3, PM10, and PM2.5. Important statistics for evaluation of air-quality model output against policy (and hence health)-relevant standards – correlation, bias, and root mean square error – were evaluated by site type, year, month and day-of-week.
Read more
Share