Interpretation of organic components from Positive Matrix Factorization of aerosol mass spectrometric data

I. M. Ulbrich; M. R. Canagaratna; Q. Zhang; D. R. Worsnop; J. L. Jimenez

doi:10.5194/acp-9-2891-2009

journal article Open Access May 05, 2009

Interpretation of organic components from Positive Matrix Factorization of aerosol mass spectrometric data

I. M. Ulbrich M. R. Canagaratna Q. Zhang

D. R. Worsnop J. L. Jimenez

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Vol. 9 No. 9 pp. 2891-2918 · Copernicus GmbH

View at Publisher Save 10.5194/acp-9-2891-2009

Abstract

Abstract. The organic aerosol (OA) dataset from an Aerodyne Aerosol Mass Spectrometer (Q-AMS) collected at the Pittsburgh Air Quality Study (PAQS) in September 2002 was analyzed with Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF). Three components – hydrocarbon-like organic aerosol OA (HOA), a highly-oxygenated OA (OOA-1) that correlates well with sulfate, and a less-oxygenated, semi-volatile OA (OOA-2) that correlates well with nitrate and chloride – are identified and interpreted as primary combustion emissions, aged SOA, and semivolatile, less aged SOA, respectively. The complexity of interpreting the PMF solutions of unit mass resolution (UMR) AMS data is illustrated by a detailed analysis of the solutions as a function of number of components and rotational forcing. A public web-based database of AMS spectra has been created to aid this type of analysis. Realistic synthetic data is also used to characterize the behavior of PMF for choosing the best number of factors, and evaluating the rotations of non-unique solutions. The ambient and synthetic data indicate that the variation of the PMF quality of fit parameter (Q, a normalized chi-squared metric) vs. number of factors in the solution is useful to identify the minimum number of factors, but more detailed analysis and interpretation are needed to choose the best number of factors. The maximum value of the rotational matrix is not useful for determining the best number of factors. In synthetic datasets, factors are "split" into two or more components when solving for more factors than were used in the input. Elements of the "splitting" behavior are observed in solutions of real datasets with several factors. Significant structure remains in the residual of the real dataset after physically-meaningful factors have been assigned and an unrealistic number of factors would be required to explain the remaining variance. This residual structure appears to be due to variability in the spectra of the components (especially OOA-2 in this case), which is likely to be a key limit of the retrievability of components from AMS datasets using PMF and similar methods that need to assume constant component mass spectra. Methods for characterizing and dealing with this variability are needed. Interpretation of PMF factors must be done carefully. Synthetic data indicate that PMF internal diagnostics and similarity to available source component spectra together are not sufficient for identifying factors. It is critical to use correlations between factor and external measurement time series and other criteria to support factor interpretations. True components with <5% of the mass are unlikely to be retrieved accurately. Results from this study may be useful for interpreting the PMF analysis of data from other aerosol mass spectrometers. Researchers are urged to analyze future datasets carefully, including synthetic analyses, and to evaluate whether the conclusions made here apply to their datasets.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

76

[1]

% vor jede Referenz Aiken, A. C., Decarlo, P. F., Kroll, J. H., Worsnop, D. R., Huffman, J. A., Docherty, K. S., Ulbrich, I. M., Mohr, C., Kimmel, J. R., Sueper, D., Sun, Y., Zhang, Q., Trimborn, A., Northway, M., Ziemann, P. J., Canagaratna, M. R., Onasch, T. B., Alfarra, M. R., Prevot, A. S. H., Dommen, J., Duplissy, J., Metzger, A., Baltensperger, U., and Jimenez, J. L.: O/C and OM/OC ratios of primary, secondary, and ambient organic aerosols with high-resolution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 4478–4485, https://doi.org/10.1021/es703009q, 2008. 10.1021/es703009q

[2]

Aiken, A. C., Salcedo, D., Cubison, M. J., Huffman, J. A., DeCarlo, P. F., Ulbrich, I. M., Docherty, K. S., Sueper, D., Kimmel, J. R., Worsnop, D. R., Trimborn, A., Northway, M., Stone, E. A., Schauer, J. J., Volkamer, R., Fortner, E., de Foy, B., Wang, J., Laskin, A., Shutthanandan, V., Zheng, J., Zhang, R., Gaffney, J., Marley, N. A., Paredes-Miranda, G., Arnott, W. P., Molina, L. T., Sosa, G., and Jimenez, J. L.: Mexico City aerosol analysis during MILAGRO using high resolution aerosol mass spectrometry at the urban supersite (T0) – Part 1: Fine particle composition and organic source apportionment, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9, 8377–8427, 2009. 10.5194/acp-9-6633-2009

[3]

Alfarra, M. R.: Insights into Atmospheric Organic Aerosols Using an Aerosol Mass Spectrometer, Thesis, University of Manchester, UK, 2004.

[4]

Alfarra, M. R., Coe, H., Allan, J. D., Bower, K. N., Boudries, H., Canagaratna, M. R., Jimenez, J. L., Jayne, J. T., Garforth, A. A., Li, S. M., and Worsnop, D. R.: Characterization of urban and rural organic particulate in the lower Fraser valley using two aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometers, Atmos. Environ., 38, 5745–5758, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.01.054, 2004. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.01.054

[5]

Alfarra, M. R., Paulsen, D., Gysel, M., Garforth, A. A., Dommen, J., Prévôt, A. S. H., Worsnop, D. R., Baltensperger, U., and Coe, H.: A mass spectrometric study of secondary organic aerosols formed from the photooxidation of anthropogenic and biogenic precursors in a reaction chamber, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 5279–5293, 2006. 10.5194/acp-6-5279-2006

[6]

Alfarra, M. R., Prévôt, A. S. H., Szidat, S., Sandradewi, J., Weimer, S., Lanz, V. A., Schreiber, D., Mohr, M., and Baltensperger, U.: Identification of the mass spectral signature of organic aerosols from wood burning emissions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 41, 5770–5777, https://doi.org/10.1021/es062289b, 2007. 10.1021/es062289b

[7]

Allan, J. D., Jimenez, J. L., Williams, P. I., Alfarra, M. R., Bower, K. N., Jayne, J. T., Coe, H., and Worsnop, D. R.: Quantitative sampling using an Aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer – 1. Techniques of data interpretation and error analysis, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 108, 4090, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002358, 2003. 10.1029/2002jd002358

[8]

Allan, J. D., Delia, A. E., Coe, H., Bower, K. N., Alfarra, M. R., Jimenez, J. L., Middlebrook, A. M., Drewnick, F., Onasch, T. B., Canagaratna, M. R., Jayne, J. T., and Worsnopf, D. R.: A generalised method for the extraction of chemically resolved mass spectra from aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer data, J. Aerosol Sci., 35, 909–922, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2004.02.007, 2004. 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2004.02.007

[9]

Bahreini, R., Keywood, M. D., Ng, N. L., Varutbangkul, V., Gao, S., Flagan, R. C., Seinfeld, J. H., Worsnop, D. R., and Jimenez, J. L.: Measurements of secondary organic aerosol from oxidation of cycloalkenes, terpenes, and m-xylene using an Aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer, Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 5674–5688, https://doi.org/10.1021/es048061a, 2005. 10.1021/es048061a

[10]

Brinkman, G., Vance, G., Hannigan, M. P., and Milford, J. B.: Use of synthetic data to evaluate positive matrix factorization as a source apportionment tool for PM$_2.5$ exposure data, Environ. Sci. Technol., 40, 1892–1901, https://doi.org/10.1021/es051712y, 2006. 10.1021/es051712y

[11]

Cabada, J. C., Pandis, S. N., Subramanian, R., Robinson, A. L., Polidori, A., and Turpin, B.: Estimating the secondary organic aerosol contribution to PM$_2.5$ using the EC tracer method, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 38, 140–155, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820390229084, 2004. 10.1080/02786820390229084

[12]

Canagaratna, M. R., Jayne, J. T., Ghertner, D. A., Herndon, S., Shi, Q., Jimenez, J. L., Silva, P. J., Williams, P., Lanni, T., Drewnick, F., Demerjian, K. L., Kolb, C. E., and Worsnop, D. R.: Chase studies of particulate emissions from in-use New York City vehicles, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 38, 555-573, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820490465504, 2004. 10.1080/02786820490465504

[13]

Canagaratna, M., Worsnop, D., Zhang, Q., and Jimenez, J. L.: Aerosol Mass Spectrometry of Organic Aerosol in Houston, Texas, International Aerosol Conference, St. Paul, MN, USA, 2006.

[14]

Canagaratna, M. R., Jayne, J. T., Jimenez, J. L., Allan, J. D., Alfarra, M. R., Zhang, Q., Onasch, T. B., Drewnick, F., Coe, H., Middlebrook, A., Delia, A., Williams, L. R., Trimborn, A. M., Northway, M. J., DeCarlo, P. F., Kolb, C. E., Davidovits, P., and Worsnop, D. R.: Chemical and microphysical characterization of ambient aerosols with the aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer, Mass Spectrom. Rev., 26, 185–222, https://doi.org/10.1002/mas.20115, 2007. 10.1002/mas.20115

[15]

Christensen, W., Williams, B., and Reese, C.: Bayesian Approaches for Pollution Source Location Identification and Apportionment, American Association of Aerosol Researchers Conference, Reno, NV, USA, 2007.

[16]

Crosier, J., Jimenez, J. L., Allan, J. D., Bower, K. N., Williams, P. I., Alfarra, M. R., Canagaratna, M. R., Jayne, J. T., Worsnop, D. R., and Coe, H.: Technical note: Description and use of the new jump mass spectrum mode of operation for the aerodyne quadrupole aerosol mass spectrometers (Q-AMS), Aerosol Sci. Tech., 41, 865–872, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820701501899, 2007. 10.1080/02786820701501899

[17]

DeCarlo, P. F., Kimmel, J. R., Trimborn, A., Northway, M. J., Jayne, J. T., Aiken, A. C., Gonin, M., Fuhrer, K., Horvath, T., Docherty, K. S., Worsnop, D. R., and Jimenez, J. L.: Field-deployable, high-resolution, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer, Anal. Chem., 78, 8281–8289, https://doi.org/10.1021/ac061249n, 2006. 10.1021/ac061249n

[18]

Drewnick, F., Hings, S. S., DeCarlo, P., Jayne, J. T., Gonin, M., Fuhrer, K., Weimer, S., Jimenez, J. L., Demerjian, K. L., Borrmann, S., and Worsnop, D. R.: A new time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (TOF-AMS) - Instrument description and first field deployment, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 637–658, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820500182040, 2005. 10.1080/02786820500182040

[19]

Dzepina, K., Arey, J., Marr, L. C., Worsnop, D. R., Salcedo, D., Zhang, Q., Onasch, T. B., Molina, L. T., Molina, M. J., and Jimenez, J. L.: Detection of particle-phase polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in Mexico City using an aerosol mass spectrometer, Int. J. Mass spectrom., 263, 152–170, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijms.2007.01.010, 2007. 10.1016/j.ijms.2007.01.010

[20]

Engel-Cox, J. and Weber, S. A.: Compilation and Assessment of Recent Positive Matrix Factorization and UNMIX Receptor Model Studies on Fine Particulate Matter Source Apportionment for the Eastern United States, J. Air Waste Manage., 57, 1307–1316, https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.57.11.1307, 2007. 10.3155/1047-3289.57.11.1307

[21]

Fuzzi, S., Decesari, S., Facchini, M. C., Matta, E., Mircea, M., and Tagliavini, E.: A simplified model of the water soluble organic component of atmospheric aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 4079–4082, 2001. 10.1029/2001gl013418

[22]

Hemann, J. G., Brinkman, G. L., Dutton, S. J., Hannigan, M. P., Milford, J. B., and Miller, S. L.: Assessing positive matrix factorization model fit: a new method to estimate uncertainty and bias in factor contributions at the measurement time scale, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 497–513, 2009. 10.5194/acp-9-497-2009

[23]

Hoyer, P. O.: Non-negative matrix factorization with sparseness constraints, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 5, 1457–1469, 2004.

[24]

Huffman, J. A., Docherty, K. S., Aiken, A. C., Cubison, M. J., Ulbrich, I. M., DeCarlo, P. F., Sueper, D., Jayne, J. T., Worsnop, D. R., Ziemann, P. J., and Jimenez, J. L.: Chemically-resolved aerosol volatility measurements from two megacity field studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9, 2645–2697, 2009. 10.5194/acpd-9-2645-2009

[25]

Jayne, J. T., Leard, D. C., Zhang, X. F., Davidovits, P., Smith, K. A., Kolb, C. E., and Worsnop, D. R.: Development of an aerosol mass spectrometer for size and composition analysis of submicron particles, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 33, 49–70, 2000. 10.1080/027868200410840

[26]

Jimenez, J. L., Jayne, J. T., Shi, Q., Kolb, C. E., Worsnop, D. R., Yourshaw, I., Seinfeld, J. H., Flagan, R. C., Zhang, X. F., Smith, K. A., Morris, J. W., and Davidovits, P.: Ambient aerosol sampling using the Aerodyne Aerosol Mass Spectrometer, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 108, 8425, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001213, 2003. 10.1029/2001jd001213

[27]

Kanakidou, M., Seinfeld, J. H., Pandis, S. N., Barnes, I., Dentener, F. J., Facchini, M. C., Van Dingenen, R., Ervens, B., Nenes, A., Nielsen, C. J., Swietlicki, E., Putaud, J. P., Balkanski, Y., Fuzzi, S., Horth, J., Moortgat, G. K., Winterhalter, R., Myhre, C. E. L., Tsigaridis, K., Vignati, E., Stephanou, E. G., and Wilson, J.: Organic aerosol and global climate modelling: a review, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 1053–1123, 2005. 10.5194/acp-5-1053-2005

[28]

Kim, E., Hopke, P. K., and Edgerton, E. S.: Source identification of Atlanta aerosol by positive matrix factorization, J. Air Waste Manage., 53, 731–739, 2003. 10.1080/10473289.2003.10466209

[29]

Lanz, V. A., Alfarra, M. R., Baltensperger, U., Buchmann, B., Hueglin, C., and Prévôt, A. S. H.: Source apportionment of submicron organic aerosols at an urban site by factor analytical modelling of aerosol mass spectra, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 1503–1522, 2007. 10.5194/acp-7-1503-2007

[30]

Lanz, V. A., Alfarra, M. R., Baltensperger, U., Buchmann, B., Hueglin, C., Szidat, S., Wehrli, M. N., Wacker, L., Weimer, S., Caseiro, A., Puxbaum, H., and Prevot, A. S. H.: Source Attribution of Submicron Organic Aerosols during Wintertime Inversions by Advanced Factor Analysis of Aerosol Mass Spectra, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 214–220, https://doi.org/10.1021/es0707207, 2008. 10.1021/es0707207

[31]

Larsen, R. K. and Baker, J. E.: Source apportionment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the urban atmosphere: A comparison of three methods, Environ. Sci. Technol., 37, 1873–1881, https://doi.org/10.1021/es0206184, 2003. 10.1021/es0206184

[32]

Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization

Daniel D. Lee, H. Sebastian Seung

Nature 10.1038/44565

[33]

Lee, E., Chan, C. K., and Paatero, P.: Application of positive matrix factorization in source apportionment of particulate pollutants in Hong Kong, Atmos. Environ., 33, 3201–3212, 1999. 10.1016/s1352-2310(99)00113-2

[34]

Lingwall, J. W., Christensen, W. F., and Reese, C. S.: Dirichlet based Bayesian multivariate receptor modeling, Environmetrics, 19, 618–629, https://doi.org/10.1002/env.902, 2008. 10.1002/env.902

[35]

Lu, J. H. and Wu, L. S.: Technical details and programming guide for a general two-way positive matrix factorization algorithm, J. Chemom., 18, 519–525, https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.894, 2004. 10.1002/cem.894

[36]

Marcolli, C., Canagaratna, M. R., Worsnop, D. R., Bahreini, R., de Gouw, J. A., Warneke, C., Goldan, P. D., Kuster, W. C., Williams, E. J., Lerner, B. M., Roberts, J. M., Meagher, J. F., Fehsenfeld, F. C., Marchewka, M., Bertman, S. B., and Middlebrook, A. M.: Cluster Analysis of the Organic Peaks in Bulk Mass Spectra Obtained During the 2002 New England Air Quality Study with an Aerodyne Aerosol Mass Spectrometer, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 5649–5666, 2006. 10.5194/acp-6-5649-2006

[37]

Maykut, N. N., Lewtas, J., Kim, E., and Larson, T. V.: Source apportionment of PM2.5 at an urban IMPROVE site in Seattle, Washington, Environ. Sci. Technol., 37, 5135–5142, https://doi.org/10.1021/es030370y, 2003. 10.1021/es030370y

[38]

Mohr, C., Huffman, J. A., Cubison, M. J., Aiken, A. C., Docherty, K. S., Kimmel, J. R., Ulbrich, I. M., Hannigan, M. P., and Jimenez, J. L.: Characterization of Primary Organic Aerosol Emissions from Meat Cooking, Trash Burning, and Motor Vehicles with High-Resolution Aerosol Mass Spectrometry and Comparison with Ambient and Chamber Observations, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 2443–2449, https://doi.org/10.1021/es8011518, 2009. 10.1021/es8011518

[39]

Murphy, D. M., Middlebrook, A. M., and Warshawsky, M.: Cluster analysis of data from the Particle Analysis by Laser Mass Spectrometry (PALMS) instrument, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 37, 382–391, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820390125241, 2003. 10.1080/02786820300971

[40]

Murphy, D. M.: The design of single particle laser mass spectrometers, Mass Spectrom. Rev., 26, 150–165, https://doi.org/10.1002/mas.20113, 2007. 10.1002/mas.20113

[41]

Nemitz, E., Jimenez, J. L., Huffman, J. A., Ulbrich, I. M., Canagaratna, M. R., Worsnop, D. R., and Guenther, A. B.: An eddy-covariance system for the measurement of surface/atmosphere exchange fluxes of submicron aerosol chemical species – First application above an urban area, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 42, 636–657, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820802227352, 2008. 10.1080/02786820802227352

[42]

Norris, G., Vedantham, R., Wade, K., Brown, S., Prouty, J., and Foley, C.: EPA Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) 3.0 Fundamentals and User Guide, Washington DC, USA, 2008.

[43]

Paatero, P. and Tapper, U.: Analysis of different modes of factor analysis as least squares fit problems, Chemometr. Intell. Lab., 18, 183–194, 1993. 10.1016/0169-7439(93)80055-m

[44]

Paatero, P. and Tapper, U.: Positive Matrix Factorization: a non-negative factor model with optimal utilization of error estimates of data values, Environmetrics, 5, 111–126, 1994. 10.1002/env.3170050203

[45]

Paatero, P.: Least squares formulation of robust non-negative factor analysis, Chemometr. Intell. Lab., 37, 23–35, 1997. 10.1016/s0169-7439(96)00044-5

[46]

Paatero, P.: The multilinear engine – A table-driven, least squares program for solving multilinear problems, including the n-way parallel factor analysis model, J. Comput. Graph. Stat., 8, 854–888, 1999. 10.1080/10618600.1999.10474853

[47]

Paatero, P., Hopke, P. K., Song, X. H., and Ramadan, Z.: Understanding and controlling rotations in factor analytic models, Chemometr. Intell. Lab., 60, 253–264, 2002. 10.1016/s0169-7439(01)00200-3

[48]

Paatero, P. and Hopke, P. K.: Discarding or downweighting high-noise variables in factor analytic models, Anal. Chim. Acta, 490, 277–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-2670(02)01643-4, 2003. 10.1016/s0003-2670(02)01643-4

[49]

Paatero, P., Hopke, P. K., Begum, B. A., and Biswas, S. K.: A graphical diagnostic method for assessing the rotation in factor analytical models of atmospheric pollution, Atmos. Environ., 39, 193–201, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.08.018, 2005. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.08.018

[50]

Paatero, P.: User's guide for positive matrix factorization programs PMF2.EXE and PMF3.EXE, University of Helsinki, Finland, 2007.

Showing 50 of 76 references

Cited By

1,275

Measurement report: Impact of cloud processes on secondary organic aerosols at a forested mountain site in southeastern China

Weiqi Xu, Wei Zhou · 2024

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Chemometrics for environmental monitoring: a review

Madeleine F. Dupont, Aaron Elbourne · 2020

Analytical Methods

The potential role of methanesulfonic acid (MSA) in aerosol formation and growth and the associated radiative forcings

Anna L. Hodshire, Pedro Campuzano-Jost · 2019

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Influence of intense secondary aerosol formation and long-range transport on aerosol chemistry and properties in the Seoul Metropolitan Area during spring time: results from KORUS-AQ

Hwajin Kim, Qi Zhang · 2018

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Chemical composition, sources and secondary processes of aerosols in Baoji city of northwest China

Y.C. Wang, R.-J. Huang · 2017

Atmospheric Environment

Effects of gas–wall partitioning in Teflon tubing and instrumentation on time-resolved measurements of gas-phase organic compounds

Demetrios Pagonis, Jordan E. Krechmer · 2017

Atmospheric Measurement Techniques

Source Apportionment of PM2.5 in Delhi, India Using PMF Model

S. K. Sharma, T. K. Mandal · 2016

Bulletin of Environmental Contamina...

Organic Aerosols Associated with the Generation of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) by Water-Soluble PM2.5

Vishal Verma, Ting Fang · 2015

Environmental Science & Technol...

Black carbon physical properties and mixing state in the European megacity Paris

M. Laborde, M. Crippa · 2013

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Online measurements of the emissions of intermediate-volatility and semi-volatile organic compounds from aircraft

E. S. Cross, J. F. Hunter · 2013

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Organic nitrogen in the atmosphere — Where does it come from? A review of sources and methods

J.N. Cape, S.E. Cornell · 2011

Atmospheric Research

The Pasadena Aerosol Characterization Observatory (PACO): chemical and physical analysis of the Western Los Angeles basin aerosol

S. P. Hersey, J. S. Craven · 2011

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Evolution of Organic Aerosols in the Atmosphere

J. L. Jimenez, M. R. Canagaratna · 2009

Science

Metrics

1,275

Citations

76

References

Details

Published: May 05, 2009
Vol/Issue: 9(9)
Pages: 2891-2918
License: View

Authors

State Key Lab for Biocontrol, Institute of Entomology, Zhongshan University, Guangzhou 510275,2 and

Cite This Article

I. M. Ulbrich, M. R. Canagaratna, Q. Zhang, et al. (2009). Interpretation of organic components from Positive Matrix Factorization of aerosol mass spectrometric data. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 9(9), 2891-2918. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-2891-2009

Interpretation of organic components from Positive Matrix Factorization of aerosol mass spectrometric data

You May Also Like