skip to main content
10.1145/3437963.3441731acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Modeling Inter-station Relationships with Attentive Temporal Graph Convolutional Network for Air Quality Prediction

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 March 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Air pollution is an important environmental issue of increasing concern, which impacts human health. Accurate air quality prediction is crucial for avoiding people suffering from serious air pollution. Most of the prior works focus on capturing the temporal trend of air quality for each monitoring station. Recent deep learning based methods also model spatial dependencies among neighboring stations. However, we observe that besides geospatially adjacent stations, the stations which share similar functionalities or consistent temporal patterns could also have strong dependencies. In this paper, we propose an Attentive Temporal Graph Convolutional Network (ATGCN) to model diverse inter-station relationships for air quality prediction of citywide stations. Specifically, we first encode three types of relationships among stations including spatial adjacency, functional similarity, and temporal pattern similarity into graphs. Then we design parallel encoding modules, which respectively incorporate attentive graph convolution operations into the Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs) to iteratively aggregate features from related stations with different graphs. Furthermore, augmented with an attention-based fusion unit, decoding modules with a similar structure to the encoding modules are designed to generate multi-step predictions for all stations. The experiments on two real-world datasets demonstrate the superior performance of our model beyond state-of-the-art methods.

References

  1. James Atwood and Don Towsley. 2016. Diffusion-convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1993--2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Lei Bai, Lina Yao, Salil S Kanhere, Xianzhi Wang, and Quan Z Sheng. 2019. STG2seq: spatial-temporal graph to sequence model for multi-step passenger demand forecasting. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1981--1987.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Samy Bengio, Oriol Vinyals, Navdeep Jaitly, and Noam Shazeer. 2015. Scheduled sampling for sequence prediction with recurrent neural networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 1171--1179.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Junyoung Chung, Caglar Gulcehre, KyungHyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.3555 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Luis A D'iaz-Robles, Juan C Ortega, Joshua S Fu, Gregory D Reed, Judith C Chow, John G Watson, and Juan A Moncada-Herrera. 2008. A hybrid ARIMA and artificial neural networks model to forecast particulate matter in urban areas: The case of Temuco, Chile. Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 42, 35 (2008), 8331--8340.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Shen Fang, Qi Zhang, Gaofeng Meng, Shiming Xiang, and Chunhong Pan. 2019. GSTNet: Global Spatial-Temporal Network for Traffic Flow Prediction.. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2286--2293.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Xu Geng, Yaguang Li, Leye Wang, Lingyu Zhang, Qiang Yang, Jieping Ye, and Yan Liu. 2019. Spatiotemporal multi-graph convolution network for ride-hailing demand forecasting. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 3656--3663.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. P Goyal, Andy T Chan, and Neeru Jaiswal. 2006. Statistical models for the prediction of respirable suspended particulate matter in urban cities. Atmospheric environment, Vol. 40, 11 (2006), 2068--2077.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Shengnan Guo, Youfang Lin, Ning Feng, Chao Song, and Huaiyu Wan. 2019. Attention based spatial-temporal graph convolutional networks for traffic flow forecasting. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 922--929.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jie He, Kun Yang, Wenjun Tang, Hui Lu, Jun Qin, Yingying Chen, and Xin Li. 2020. The first high-resolution meteorological forcing dataset for land process studies over China. Scientific Data, Vol. 7, 1 (2020), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Marilena Kampa and Elias Castanas. 2008. Human health effects of air pollution. Environmental pollution, Vol. 151, 2 (2008), 362--367.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2015. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling. 2017. Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Xiang Li, Ling Peng, Yuan Hu, Jing Shao, and Tianhe Chi. 2016. Deep learning architecture for air quality predictions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 23, 22 (2016), 22408--22417.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Yaguang Li, Rose Yu, Cyrus Shahabi, and Yan Liu. 2017. Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural network: Data-driven traffic forecasting. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Yuxuan Liang, Songyu Ke, Junbo Zhang, Xiuwen Yi, and Yu Zheng. 2018. Geoman: Multi-level attention networks for geo-sensory time series prediction. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 3428--3434.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Haobing Liu, Yanmin Zhu, Tianzi Zang, Jiadi Yu, and Haibin Cai. 2020. Jointly Modeling Individual Student Behaviors and Social Influence for Prediction Tasks. In ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 865--874.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhipeng Luo, Jianqiang Huang, Ke Hu, Xue Li, and Peng Zhang. 2019. AccuAir: Winning solution to air quality prediction for KDD Cup 2018. In ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining. 1842--1850.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Zheyi Pan, Yuxuan Liang, Weifeng Wang, Yong Yu, Yu Zheng, and Junbo Zhang. 2019. Urban traffic prediction from spatio-temporal data using deep meta learning. In ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining. 1720--1730.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Zhongang Qi, Tianchun Wang, Guojie Song, Weisong Hu, Xi Li, and Zhongfei Zhang. 2018. Deep air learning: Interpolation, prediction, and feature analysis of fine-grained air quality. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 30, 12 (2018), 2285--2297.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. A Suárez Sánchez, PJ Garc'ia Nieto, Francisco Javier Iglesias-Rodr'iguez, and JA Vilán Vilán. 2013. Nonlinear air quality modeling using support vector machines in Gijón urban area (Northern Spain) at local scale. International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation, Vol. 14, 5 (2013), 291--305.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Xingjian Shi, Zhourong Chen, Hao Wang, Dit-Yan Yeung, Wai-Kin Wong, and Wang-chun Woo. 2015. Convolutional LSTM network: A machine learning approach for precipitation nowcasting. Advances in neural information processing systems, Vol. 28 (2015), 802--810.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, and Quoc V Le. 2014. Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 3104--3112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Sotiris Vardoulakis, Bernard EA Fisher, Koulis Pericleous, and Norbert Gonzalez-Flesca. 2003. Modelling air quality in street canyons: a review. Atmospheric environment, Vol. 37, 2 (2003), 155--182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Petar Velivc ković, Guillem Cucurull, Arantxa Casanova, Adriana Romero, Pietro Liò, and Yoshua Bengio. 2018. Graph Attention Networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Zonghan Wu, Shirui Pan, Guodong Long, Jing Jiang, and Chengqi Zhang. 2019. Graph wavenet for deep spatial-temporal graph modeling. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1907--1913.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Huaxiu Yao, Fei Wu, Jintao Ke, Xianfeng Tang, Yitian Jia, Siyu Lu, Pinghua Gong, Jieping Ye, and Zhenhui Li. 2018. Deep multi-view spatial-temporal network for taxi demand prediction. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Xiuwen Yi, Junbo Zhang, Zhaoyuan Wang, Tianrui Li, and Yu Zheng. 2018. Deep distributed fusion network for air quality prediction. In ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining. 965--973.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Bing Yu, Haoteng Yin, and Zhanxing Zhu. 2018. Spatio-temporal graph convolutional networks: a deep learning framework for traffic forecasting. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 3634--3640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Junbo Zhang, Yu Zheng, and Dekang Qi. 2017. Deep spatio-temporal residual networks for citywide crowd flows prediction. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Yang Zhang, Marc Bocquet, Vivien Mallet, Christian Seigneur, and Alexander Baklanov. 2012. Real-time air quality forecasting, part I: History, techniques, and current status. Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 60 (2012), 632--655.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Yawen Zhang, Qin Lv, Duanfeng Gao, Si Shen, Robert Dick, Michael Hannigan, and Qi Liu. 2019. Multi-group encoder-decoder networks to fuse heterogeneous data for next-day air quality prediction. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 4341--4347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Yu Zheng, Furui Liu, and Hsun-Ping Hsieh. 2013. U-air: When urban air quality inference meets big data. In ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 1436--1444.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Yu Zheng, Xiuwen Yi, Ming Li, Ruiyuan Li, Zhangqing Shan, Eric Chang, and Tianrui Li. 2015. Forecasting fine-grained air quality based on big data. In ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 2267--2276.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Xian Zhou, Yanyan Shen, Yanmin Zhu, and Linpeng Huang. 2018. Predicting multi-step citywide passenger demands using attention-based neural networks. In ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. 736--744.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Modeling Inter-station Relationships with Attentive Temporal Graph Convolutional Network for Air Quality Prediction

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          WSDM '21: Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
          March 2021
          1192 pages
          ISBN:9781450382977
          DOI:10.1145/3437963

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 8 March 2021

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate498of2,863submissions,17%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader