PurpleAir sensors, which measure particulate matter (PM), are widely used by individuals, community groups, and other organizations including state and local air monitoring agencies. PurpleAir sensors comprise a massive global network of more than 10 000 sensors. Previous performance evaluations have typically studied a limited number of PurpleAir sensors in small geographic areas or laboratory environments. While useful for determining sensor behavior and data normalization for these geographic areas, little work has been done to understand the broad applicability of these results outside these regions and conditions. Here, PurpleAir sensors operated by air quality monitoring agencies are evaluated in comparison to collocated ambient air quality regulatory instruments. In total, almost 12 000 24 h averaged PM_2.5 measurements from collocated PurpleAir sensors and Federal Reference Method (FRM) or Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) PM_2.5 measurements were collected across diverse regions of the United States (US), including 16 states. Consistent with previous evaluations, under typical ambient and smoke-impacted conditions, the raw data from PurpleAir sensors overestimate PM_2.5 concentrations by about 40 % in most parts of the US. A simple linear regression reduces much of this bias across most US regions, but adding a relative humidity term further reduces the bias and improves consistency in the biases between different regions. More complex multiplicative models did not substantially improve results when tested on an independent dataset. The final PurpleAir correction reduces the root mean square error (RMSE) of the raw data from 8 to 3 µg m⁻³, with an average FRM or FEM concentration of 9 µg m⁻³. This correction equation, along with proposed data cleaning criteria, has been applied to PurpleAir PM_2.5 measurements across the US on the AirNow Fire and Smoke Map (https://fire.airnow.gov/, last access: 14 May 2021) and has the potential to be successfully used in other air quality and public health applications.

In May 2017, a two-day workshop was held in Los Angeles (California, U.S.A.) to gather practitioners who work with low-cost sensors used to make air quality measurements. The community of practice included individuals from academia, industry, non-profit groups, community-based organizations, and regulatory agencies. The group gathered to share knowledge developed from a variety of pilot projects in hopes of advancing the collective knowledge about how best to use low-cost air quality sensors. Panel discussion topics included: (1) best practices for deployment and calibration of low-cost sensor systems, (2) data standardization efforts and database design, (3) advances in sensor calibration, data management, and data analysis and visualization, and (4) lessons learned from research/community partnerships to encourage purposeful use of sensors and create change/action. Panel discussions summarized knowledge advances and project successes while also highlighting the questions, unresolved issues, and technological limitations that still remain within the low-cost air quality sensor arena.

PurpleAir particulate matter (PM) sensors are increasingly used in the United States and other countries for real-time air quality information, particularly during wildfire smoke episodes. Uncorrected PurpleAir data can be biased and may exhibit a nonlinear response at extreme smoke concentrations (>300 µg/m³). This bias and nonlinearity result in a disagreement with the traditional ambient monitoring network, leading to the public’s confusion during smoke episodes. These sensors must be evaluated during smoke-impacted times and then corrected for bias, to ensure that accurate data are reported. The nearby public PurpleAir sensor and monitor pairs were identified during the summer of 2020 and were used to supplement the data from collocated pairs to develop an extended U.S.-wide correction for high concentrations. We evaluated several correction schemes to identify an optimal correction, using the previously developed U.S.-wide correction, up to 300 µg/m³, transitioning to a quadradic fit above 400 µg/m³. The correction reduces the bias at each air quality index (AQI) breakpoint; most ambient collocations that were studied met the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) performance targets (twelve of the thirteen ambient sensors met the EPA’s targets) and some smoke-impacted sites (5 out of 15 met the EPA’s performance targets in terms of the 1-h averages). This correction can also be used to improve the comparability of PurpleAir sensor data with regulatory-grade monitors when they are collectively analyzed or shown together on public information websites; the methods developed in this paper can also be used to correct future air-sensor types. The PurpleAir network is already filling in spatial and temporal gaps in the regulatory monitoring network and providing valuable air-quality information during smoke episodes.