Atmosphere 2025, 16(9), 998; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16090998 (registering DOI) - 23 Aug 2025
Abstract
During the last decades, development of novel low-cost sensors commercialized for indoor air quality measurements has gained interest. In this research, three AirVisual Pro air quality monitors were used to monitor PM2.5 and carbon dioxide concentrations in which two were installed indoors
[...] Read more.
During the last decades, development of novel low-cost sensors commercialized for indoor air quality measurements has gained interest. In this research, three AirVisual Pro air quality monitors were used to monitor PM2.5 and carbon dioxide concentrations in which two were installed indoors and one outdoors at two residential apartments in Central Europe (Budapest, Hungary). In our research, we present a methodology to support the evaluation of indoor sensors by utilizing official outdoor monitoring data, leveraging the fact that indoor spaces are frequently ventilated and thus influenced by outdoor conditions. We compared six-year measurement data (01.2017–12.2022) with outdoor concentrations provided by the Hungarian Air Quality Monitoring Network (HAQM). However, the well-known low spatial representativeness and high spatio-temporal variability of PM2.5 in city environments made this evaluation problematic, which needed to be addressed before comparison. Here we quantify the spatial heterogeneity of the HAQM PM2.5 data for a maximum of eight stations. Then, based on the carbon dioxide readings of the AirVisual Pro units, data filtering was performed for the AirVisual 1 and AirVisual 2 sensors located in indoor environments to identify ventilated periods (nearly 10,000 ventilated events) for the AirVisual 1 and AirVisual 2 sensors, respectively, for the comparison of indoor and outdoor PM2.5 concentrations. The AirVisual 3 sensor was placed in a garden storage, and the measurements taken there were considered outdoor values throughout. Finally, four heterogeneity criteria were set for the HAQM data to filter conditions that were assumed to be comparable with the indoor sensor data. The results indicate that the spatial heterogeneity was indeed detectable, and in approximately 50–60% of the cases, the readings could be considered as non-representative to single location comparison, but the results depend on the selected homogeneity criteria. The AirVisual and HAQM comparison indicated relatively low sensitivity to heterogeneity criteria, which is a promising result that can be exploited. AirVisual sensors generally overestimated PM2.5, but this bias could be corrected with a simple linear adjustment. Slopes changed across sensors (0.83–0.85 for AirVisual 1, 0.48–0.53 for AirVisual 2, and 0.70–0.73 for AirVisual 3), indicating general overestimation and correlations from moderate to high (R2 = 0.45–0.89) depending on the device. In contrast, when we compared the measurements only with data from the nearest reference station, we obtained a weaker match and slopes that did not match those calculated by taking into account homogeneity criteria. This research contributes to the proliferation of citizen science and supports the application of LCSs in indoor conditions.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Techniques, Instruments, and Modeling)
