If you want to avoid this, just read the paper.
I don't understand why technical people waste their time complaining about this stuff. We all have the acumen to read, understand, and debate research.
I don't understand why technical people waste their time complaining about this stuff. We all have the acumen to read, understand, and debate research.
But to be honest, the reason I read the comments (at least on a place like HN) is to get the key insight / failure without reading the article.
Is there a study to back that up? :)
If I had access, I'd try to dig into more depth into how they approached decoupling this from temperature, because that seems like a really strong confounder. I'm also a bit curious about the underlying physical cause of the change in pollution levels, (weekends? summertime?) because that seems like it could also be a confounding common cause.
Alas, I'm not interested in paying $35 for the paper.
https://pierce.atmos.colostate.edu/Monthly_Pollution_and_Cri...
Why not take this farther and just do the research myself, eh?