Methodology
This Air Quality Project harvests primary observations first, applies quality controls and target-neutral screening, then executes transparent cross-source joins. Facilities are introduced only after discovery as possible context. Legacy Google Drive material is excluded unless the original source, date, authority, SHA-256, lineage, parser and scientific quality are validated.
How This Air Quality Project works
Source-attribution caution
The automated site must not collapse these evidence classes into a single causal claim.
Evidence checks
- Source acquired
- Provenance recorded
- Parser validated
- Time alignment checked
- Monitor role checked
- Meteorology checked
- Comparator checked
- Reviewer challenge recorded
Matching discipline
Public records are linked to a target only by target-specific phrases or identifiers. Generic terms such as ERF, EfW, incinerator and energy recovery require a nearby target-specific anchor and are not enough on their own.
Public-safety rule
The public build excludes protected bundles, service-account keys, credentials, ZIP evidence packages and unredacted registers. The deployment guard fails if these appear in the public folder.
Forensic scientific evidence review
Inspect evidence coverage, freshness, source maturity, executed cross-references, uncertainty and explicit non-conclusions.
AI and model assurance
Review current deterministic execution, prohibited automated uses, evaluation gates and model provenance.
Evidence-assurance checks
Four controls govern every public release
evidence assurance is the internal technical shorthand. Public outputs use the full assurance language and never imply external approval or endorsement.
Requirements, source contracts, calculations, models, accessibility and publication rules are tested before release.
The live website and published social assets must match the exact reviewed evidence package and release receipt.
Secret leakage, unsupported claims, duplicate publication, unreviewed routes and evidence substitution are refused.
Sources, requests, transformations, model versions, artifacts, deployment and platform publication remain traceable.
Latest reviewed package timestamp: 2026-07-30T10:40:12+00:00. See sources, readiness and external review material.
Scientific evidence and software assurance are different
Scientific evidence
Measurements, station and regional coverage, descriptive calculations, source records and stated limitations are the evidence available for review.
Engineering assurance
Automated checks confirm that the pipeline followed its declared rules. They do not constitute peer review, accreditation, regulatory approval or institutional endorsement.
From a facility-context prototype to an England-wide, data-led observatory
The project began with a narrower facility-context purpose. The present pipeline discovers and evaluates official monitoring evidence first. Supplementary locations do not seed the monitoring screen, and unvalidated inherited material has no scientific influence.
This is an independent open-source project, not an official, accredited or peer-reviewed authority. Reviewers are invited to challenge the sources, station selection, units, timestamps, missing-data treatment, calculations, coverage rules and public interpretation.