<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-19-7409-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Retrospective analysis of 2015–2017 wintertime <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in China:
response to emission regulations and the role of meteorology</article-title><alt-title>Retrospective analysis of 2015–2017 wintertime
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in China</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Retrospective analysis of 2015--2017 wintertime
{$\chem{PM_{{2.5}}}$} in China}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{D.~Chen et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Dan</given-names></name>
          <email>dchen@ium.cn</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6317-0707</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Zhiquan</given-names></name>
          <email>liuz@ucar.edu</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4917-7686</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Ban</surname><given-names>Junmei</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Pusheng</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Min</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Institute of Urban Meteorology, China Meteorological Administration,
Beijing, 100089, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80301, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Zhiquan Liu (liuz@ucar.edu) and Dan Chen (dchen@ium.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>5</day><month>June</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>19</volume>
      <issue>11</issue>
      <fpage>7409</fpage><lpage>7427</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>29</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>19</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>19</day><month>February</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>23</day><month>April</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2019 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e147">To better characterize anthropogenic emission-relevant aerosol
species, the Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) and Weather Research and
Forecasting with Chemistry
(WRF/Chem) data assimilation system was updated from the
GOCART aerosol scheme to the Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC) 4-bin (MOSAIC-4BIN) aerosol scheme. Three years (2015–2017) of
wintertime (January) surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter smaller than 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) observations from more than 1600 sites
were assimilated hourly using the updated three-dimensional
variational (3DVAR) system. In the control
experiment (without assimilation) using Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China 2010 (MEIC_2010) emissions, the modeled
January averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were severely overestimated
in the Sichuan Basin, central China, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River
Delta by 98–134, 46–101, 32–59 and 19–60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively, indicating that the emissions for 2010 are not appropriate for
2015–2017, as strict emission control strategies were implemented in recent
years. Meanwhile, underestimations of 11–12, 53–96 and
22–40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed in northeastern China, Xinjiang
and the Energy Golden Triangle, respectively. The assimilation experiment
significantly reduced both high and low biases to within
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
    <p id="d1e251">The observations and the reanalysis data from the assimilation experiment
were used to investigate the year-to-year changes and the driving factors.
The role of emissions was obtained by subtracting the meteorological impacts
(by control experiments) from the total combined differences (by assimilation
experiments). The results show a reduction in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
approximately 15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the month of January from 2015 to
2016 in the North China Plain (NCP), but meteorology played the dominant role
(contributing a reduction of approximately 12 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The
change (for January) from 2016 to 2017 in NCP was different; meteorology
caused an increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of approximately
23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, while emission control measures caused a decrease
of 8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the combined effects still showed a
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increase for that region. The analysis confirmed that
emission control strategies were indeed implemented and emissions were
reduced in both years. Using a data assimilation approach, this study helps
identify the reasons why emission control strategies may or may not have an
immediately visible impact. There are still large uncertainties in this
approach, especially the inaccurate emission inputs, and neglecting
aerosol–meteorology feedbacks in the model can generate large uncertainties
in the analysis as well.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <?pagebreak page7410?><p id="d1e377">Anthropogenic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter smaller than 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) is known as a robust indicator of
mortality and other negative health effects associated with ambient air
pollution. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> components originate not only from primary
emissions but also from secondary formations through various precursors
(e.g., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and volatile organic compounds –
VOCs). Regional haze with
extremely high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (exceeding the WHO standard
tenfold) has become the primary air quality concern in China, especially over
northern China (e.g., L. T. Wang et al., 2014; W. Wang et al., 2014; Han et
al., 2015; Sun et al., 2015). To control <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution and
improve the overall air quality, a series of strict pollution control
strategies have been implemented by the government since 2010, including the
“Guiding Options on Promoting the Joint Prevention and Control of Air
Pollution to Improve Regional Air Quality” (The Central Government of the
People's Republic of China, 2010) and the <italic>Atmospheric Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan</italic> (The Central Government of the People's
Republic of China, 2013), in which the government stated that
environmentally related equipment (for flue-gas desulfurization, selective
catalyst reduction, exhaust dust removal, etc.) are mandatory for both
industries and vehicles. In addition to long-term pollution control
strategies, different emergency measures under different pollution alerts
were also implemented occasionally. For example, the production of large
industrial sources (coal burning and cement) was limited to reduce emissions,
construction sites were restricted to prevent fugitive dust pollution, and
traffic restrictions were implemented on even- and odd-numbered license
plates. These emission control strategies were stricter and implemented more
often in northern China than anywhere else in winter, when haze events occur
more frequently. These control strategies were expected to reduce both the
concentrations of significant precursors (e.g., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the emissions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e491">Despite these strict emission control strategies, the ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations in major cities still fluctuated during the wintertime from
year to year. For example, the overall January <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
in 74 cities generally decreased from 2015 to 2016, but the concentrations in
January 2017 were still higher than those in 2016 (China National Environmental Monitoring Center
“Ambient Air Quality Monthly Report 2015-01/2016-01/2017-01”,
<uri>http://www.cnemc.cn/jcbg/kqzlzkbg/</uri>, last access: 7 May 2019). While annual emission reduction trends were expected from
2015 to 2017, the overall increase in the surface concentrations observed in
January 2017 contradicted these expectations, thereby indicating that other
factors (especially meteorological conditions) in addition to emissions may
play important roles. Some studies have attempted to investigate the
variability of air pollution and the effects of climate change on wintertime
air pollution by using statistical data. Li et al. (2016) indicated that
wintertime fog–haze days across central and eastern China have a close
relationship with the East Asian winter monsoon. Zuo et al. (2015) concluded
that the significant weakening and strengthening of the Siberian high and
East Asian trough, respectively, are the two main factors for the occurrence
of extreme warm and extreme cold events over China in winter, when warm air
boosts air pollution. In addition to utilizing statistical methodology, it is
necessary to distinguish the roles of emissions and meteorology to further
investigate the driving factors of interannual air pollution changes.</p>
      <p id="d1e519">Regional air quality models are important tools for scientifically
understanding the formation of haze events, technically constructing
forecasts and evaluating the effects of control strategies. For regional
modeling studies, emission inventories are important for reflecting the
emission inputs into the atmosphere. Generally, an emission inventory is
based on a “bottom-up” methodology, thereby relying on the statistics of
energy activity, emission factors, etc. However, uncertainties in energy
statistics can cause variations in the emission estimates (Zhao et al., 2017;
Hong et al., 2017; Zhi et al., 2017). For regional
modeling applications, the total emissions based on statistics are spatially
and temporally distributed according to relevant factors (He, 2012).
Nevertheless, the occasional emission control strategies implemented in
winter can cause large uncertainties in not only total emission estimations
but also in spatial and temporal allocations, which leads to large biases
in the model simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e522">In addition to the uncertainties in emission inventories, deficiencies in the
model chemistry can also cause model uncertainties. Increasing numbers of
observations have revealed that anthropogenic emission-relevant aerosol
species, such as sulfate, nitrate and ammonium (denoted as SNA), are the
predominant inorganic species in the wintertime <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in China (Y.
S. Wang et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2015). Various reaction paths during haze
events have also been proposed (e.g., Zheng et al., 2015; Cheng et al., 2016;
Wang et al., 2016; Li et al., 2017; Moch et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2018;
Shao et al., 2019). For example, Moch et al. (2018) used a 1-D model and
revealed the importance of aqueous-phase chemistry of HCHO and S(IV) in cloud
droplets by forming a S(IV)-HCHO adduct, hydroxymethane sulfonate. Shao et
al. (2019) implemented four heterogeneous sulfate formation mechanisms (via
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and transition metal ions on
aerosols) into GEOS-Chem model, which partially reduced the modeled low bias
in sulfate concentrations. However, a scientific consensus regarding the
importance of the reaction paths has not yet been reached, partially due to
the uncertainties in aerosol liquid water content, pH, ionic strength,
etc. The original WRF/Chem model with either the Goddard Chemistry Aerosol
Radiation and Transport (GOCART; Chin et al., 2000, 2002) or the Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC) 4-bin (MOSAIC-4BIN) aerosol
scheme
failed to reproduce the highest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations; it is assumed
that this failure is due to missing heterogeneous and aqueous reactions. In Chen
et al. (2016; hereafter Chen16), we added three heterogeneous reactions
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-to-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-to-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reactions) to the WRF/Chem model based on the
MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme. Although the reaction paths may still not be
comprehensively understood, the new MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme significantly
improved the simulation of sulfate, nitrate and ammonium on polluted days in
terms of the concentrations of those species and their partitioning.</p>
      <p id="d1e643">Data assimilation (DA), that is, the combination of observations with
numerical model output, has been proven to be skillful at improving aerosol
forecasts (e.g., Collins et al., 2001; Pagowski et al., 2010; Liu et al.,
2011, 2016; Zhang et al., 2016). Liu et al. (2011; hereafter Liu11)
implemented<?pagebreak page7411?> DA on aerosol optical depth (AOD)
estimates within the National Centers for Environmental
Prediction (NCEP) Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) three-dimensional
variational (3DVAR) DA system coupled with the GOCART aerosol scheme within
the Weather Research and Forecasting with Chemistry (WRF/Chem) model (Grell et
al., 2005). Schwartz et al. (2012; hereafter S12) and Jiang et al. (2013;
hereafter Jiang13) extended the above system to assimilate surface
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The evaluation results demonstrated
improved aerosol forecasts from the DA system in studies over East Asia and
the United States.</p>
      <p id="d1e668">Following Liu11, S12 and Chen16, we updated the GSI–WRF/Chem system by
changing from the GOCART aerosol scheme to the MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme to
better characterize the complex <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution in China. We
applied the updated system to assimilate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations of
January 2015, 2016 and 2017 for two purposes: (1) to reproduce the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> output by the DA system and (2) to investigate the different
impacts of meteorological conditions and emissions on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
pollution in different years. In this paper, Sect. 2 provides descriptions
of the model, observations and methodology and addresses the updated
GSI–WRF/Chem-coupled DA system with the MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme. In
Sect. 3, the assimilation results for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
from January 2015, 2016 and 2017 are presented and compared with surface
observations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> total mass) to evaluate the DA system. In
contrast to previous applications emphasizing the forecast skill improvement
achieved by the DA system, we fully utilized reanalysis data to investigate
the driving factors of pollution and to differentiate the roles played by
meteorological conditions and emissions in different years by analyzing the
reanalysis data and model simulations. The results are given in Sect. 4,
and the conclusions are given in Sect. 5.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Model description, observations and methodology</title>
      <p id="d1e746">The WRF/Chem settings are very similar to those of Chen16, although Chen16
focused on the SNA aerosols in the North China Plain during October 2014; in
addition, several heterogeneous reactions were newly added to the original
chemistry modules to improve the SNA simulation performance. The DA system
used herein was based on the NCEP GSI system extended by Liu11 and S12. We
assimilated surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations, and the only difference is
that the MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme (32 PM species) was chosen for the
WRF/Chem model instead of the GOCART aerosol scheme. Thus, the 3-D mass
mixing ratios of those MOSAIC species at each grid point composed the
analysis (or control) variables in the GSI 3DVAR minimization process.</p>
      <p id="d1e760">Here, only a brief summary of the WRF/Chem configuration is provided below,
prior to a description of the updated GSI DA system and the settings used in
this work. The most important differences are noted, e.g., the forward
operator for observations in the GSI system.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>WRF/Chem model and emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e770">As in Chen16, version 3.6.1 of the WRF/Chem model was used in this study
(Grell et al., 2005; Fast et al., 2006). The physical parameterizations
employed in the WRF/Chem model were identical to those of Chen16, and they
are listed in Table 1. The Carbon–Bond Mechanism version Z (CBM-Z) and
MOSAIC were used as
the gas-phase and aerosol chemical mechanisms, respectively, in this study.
The aerosol species in MOSAIC are defined as black carbon (BC), organic
compounds (OCs), sulfate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), nitrate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
ammonium (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), sodium (NA), chloride (CL) and other inorganic
compounds (OIN). We used four size bins with aerosol diameters ranging from
0.039–0.1, 0.1–1.0, 1.0–2.5 and 2.5–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. The 24 variables in
the first three bins (8 species multiplied by 3 bins) consist of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
total. The newly added relative-humidity-dependent (RH-dependent)
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-to-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-to-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> heterogeneous reactions (details are
provided in Chen16) were also applied in the simulations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e893">Domain-averaged standard deviations of the background errors
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) as a function of the height for each aerosol
variable in three bins: <bold>(a)</bold> Bin 1 –
0.039–0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, <bold>(b)</bold> Bin 2 – 0.1–1.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, and <bold>(c)</bold> B in 3 – 1.0–2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e956">The model domain with a 40 km horizontal grid spacing covers most of China
and the surrounding regions (Fig. 2), and there are 57 vertical levels
extending from the surface to 10 hPa. The simulation started from 20 December of
the previous year; the first 11 d were treated as a spin-up period
and were not used in our analyses.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e963">WRF/Chem model configuration.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Aerosol scheme</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">MOSAIC (four bins; Zaveri et al., 2008)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Photolysis scheme</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Fast-J (Wild et al., 2000)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Gas-phase chemistry</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CBM-Z (Zavier and Peters, 1999)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cumulus parameterization</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Grell 3-D scheme</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Short-wave radiation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Goddard Space Flight Center short-wave radiation scheme (Chou and Suarez, 1994)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Long-wave radiation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RRTM (Mlawer et al., 1997)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Microphysics</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Single-moment 6-class scheme (Grell and Devenyi, 2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Land-surface model (LSM)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NOAH LSM (Chen and Dudhia, 2001)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Boundary-layer scheme</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">YSU (Hong et al., 2006)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Meteorology initial and boundary conditions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GFS analysis and forecast every 6 h</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial condition for chemical species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11-day spin-up</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Boundary conditions for chemical species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Averages of midlatitude aircraft profiles (McKeen et al., 2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dust and sea salt emissions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GOCART</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page7412?><p id="d1e1097">As in Chen16, the Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China (MEIC; Zhang
et al., 2009; Lei et al., 2011; He, 2012; Li et al., 2014) for January 2010
was used as the emission input, as it is the only emission inventory that was
publicly available when the study was conducted. The original grid spacing of
the MEIC is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and this inventory has been
processed to match the model grid spacing (40 km). The spatial distributions
of primary <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are shown in Fig. 2. The Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China 2010 (MEIC_2010) emission inventory
has already been applied in other studies (e.g., L. T. Wang et al., 2014;
Zheng et al., 2015) for simulations over China in the past few years; these
recent studies found that the MEIC provides reasonable estimates of total
emissions but is subject to uncertainties in the spatial allocations of these
emissions over small spatial scales. For our simulations, uncertainties may
also arise from two other sources: the difference between the emission base
year (2010) and our simulation period (2015 through 2017) and the monthly
allocations. As the Chinese government has implemented strict control
strategies to ensure improved air quality during the winter season since
2013, significant reductions in emissions, including primary PM and precursor
compounds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in regions with the
strict implementation of these policies relative to the year 2010, are
expected for our simulation period. A reduction in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution of
approximately 50 % was observed from 2012–2015 for the North China Plain
from Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) satellite data (Krotkov et al., 2016). National anthropogenic
emission reductions of approximately 67 %, 17 % and 35 % from
2012–2017 for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively, were assumed by the bottom-up emission inventory
(EI) methodology (Zheng et al.,
2018). However, the expansion and relocation of the energy industry caused
emission increases in northwestern China (Ling et al., 2017). In addition, the uncertainties of
allocated emissions in the winter season will be much larger than those in
other seasons. For example, Zhi et al. (2017) conducted a village energy
survey and revealed an enormous discrepancy in the amount of rural raw coal
used for winter heating in northern China, implying an extreme
underestimation of rural household coal consumption by the China Energy
Statistical Yearbooks. These changes and uncertainties of emissions in the
model would introduce errors into the NO_DA simulation. However, the
inhomogeneous spatial changes and large uncertainties in seasonal allocations
made it difficult to simply scale the original emission inventory for our
study period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1233">Spatial distribution of primary <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<bold>a</bold>; the sum of BC, OC,
sulfate, nitrate and other unspecified <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions),
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(b)</bold>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(c)</bold> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(d)</bold> emissions (units are
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mol km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the other three) used in
this study.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Updated GSI 3DVAR DA system</title>
      <p id="d1e1386">The NCEP's GSI 3DVAR DA system was used to assimilate surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
observations. The GSI 3DVAR DA system calculates a best-fit analysis
considering the observations (hourly surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
in our case) and background fields (a 1 h short-term WRF/Chem forecast in
our case) weighted by their error characteristics. The GSI 3DVAR DA system
produces an analysis in a model grid space through the minimization of a
scalar objective function <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> given by

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M93" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>1</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">y</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the background
vector (with dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a vector of observations (with dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>),
and <bold>B</bold> and <bold>R</bold> represent the background and observation error covariance
matrices with dimensions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively. The covariance matrices determine the relative contributions
of the background and observation terms to the final analysis. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
potentially nonlinear “observation operator” that interpolates the model
grid point values into observation<?pagebreak page7413?> spaces and converts model-predicted
variables into observed quantities.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>2.2.1</label><?xmltex \opttitle{{$\protect\chem{PM_{{2.5}}}$} observation operator}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observation operator</title>
      <?pagebreak page7414?><p id="d1e1628">In our updated DA system, GSI was used to assimilate surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
total mass observations, whereas the WRF/Chem model predicts the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> total mass as different prognostic variables depending on the
chosen aerosol scheme. As we chose the MOSAIC-4BIN aerosol scheme, the
analyzed variables here were the 3-D mass mixing ratios of the 24 MOSAIC
aerosol variables at each grid point. The model-simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
observations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were computed by summing the 24 species as
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M106" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:munderover><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mfenced close="" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mfenced close="]" open=""><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CL</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NA</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OIN</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the bin number in the MOSAIC aerosol scheme, where the
first three bins consist of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> total, and BC, OC,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, NA, CL and OIN denote black
carbon, organic compounds, sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, sodium, chloride and
other inorganic compounds, respectively. This formula is identical to that
used in the WRF/Chem MOSAIC scheme to diagnose <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
WRF/Chem-simulated aerosol mixing ratios of the species listed inside the
brackets of Eq. (2) are in units of milligrams per kilogram, and thus the dry air density <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
multiplied to convert the units into <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for consistency with the observations.</p>
      <p id="d1e1921">Since only surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> total mass observations were assimilated
to analyze the 3-D mass mixing ratios of 24 aerosol variables, the 3DVAR
problem was underconstrained. Due to the lack of species and vertical
information provided by the observations, the only mathematical solution is
to utilize prior information from the model background. In the GSI system,
the distribution of the analysis increments (the difference between the
analysis and background) onto the different species was mostly driven by the
model,
with the observation and background error covariance matrices acting as the
main constraints. This speciated approach to aerosol DA within a variational
system was introduced by Liu11 and further applied by S12 and Jiang13. By
using individual aerosol species as the control variables, no assumptions
were made regarding the contribution of each species' mass to the total
aerosol mass or to the shapes of the vertical profiles.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>2.2.2</label><?xmltex \opttitle{{$\protect\chem{PM_{{2.5}}}$} observations and errors}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations and errors</title>
      <p id="d1e1954">Hourly surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations for January 2015–2017 were
obtained from the China National Environmental Monitoring Center (CNEMC).
There are more than 1600 sites in our modeling domain. As the more than 1600 monitoring
sites fall into 531 model grids, all observations within the same grid are
averaged (as well as the latitude and longitude) for the purpose of
performing statistical calculations and evaluation. The observation sites
(Fig. 3) span mostly northern, central and eastern China, while the sites are
relatively sparse in western China.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1970">Observed and modeled monthly average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (unit: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for January 2015 (left), 2016 (middle) and 2017 (right). Regions defined in red rectangles in <bold>(a)</bold> are as follows: a – NCP (North China
Plain), b – NEC (northeastern China), c – EGT (Energy Golden Triangle), d – XJ
(Xinjiang), e – FWP (Fenwei Plain), f – SB (Sichuan Basin), g – CC (central China), h – YRD (Yangtze River
Delta) – and i – PRD (Pearl River Delta).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e2013">The observation error covariance matrix <bold>R</bold> in Eq. (1) contains both
measurement and representativeness errors. Pagowski et al. (2010) used a
measurement error (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
To associate higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values with
larger measurement errors, S12 defined the measurement error as
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0075</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes an AIRNow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observation and the units
of each term are micrograms per cubic meter. According to
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Auto-Monitoring Instrument Technical Standard and Requirement
(China National Environmental Monitoring Center, 2013), three continuous
online monitoring methods, namely, a beta ray plus dynamic heating system, a
beta ray plus dynamic heating system plus light a scattering system, and a
tapered element oscillating microbalance plus filter dynamic measurement
system, are used at the national monitoring sites to satisfy the requirements
that the display resolution should be less than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
the error should be less than 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (within 24 h). To reflect the confidence in
the hourly observations, the measurement error <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
this study is defined as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0075</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
observational value (unit: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e2261">Representativeness errors reflect the inaccuracies in the forward operator
and in the interpolation from the model grid to the observation location.
Elbern et al. (2007), Pagowski et al. (2010), S12 and Jiang13
defined the representativeness error (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) as

                  <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M141" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msqrt><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is an adjustable parameter scaling <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was used here), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the grid spacing (40 km
in our case) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the radius of influence of an observation (set to 2 km
for urban sites). These parameter settings were based on the performance of
sensitivity tests. The total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> error (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is defined as

                  <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M149" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

            which constituted the diagonal elements in the <bold>R</bold> matrix. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
data were provided in near-real time without any data quality control. To
ensure the data quality before DA, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observational values
larger than 1000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (the maximum
display limit of the monitoring system) were deemed unrealistic in the filter
process and thus were not assimilated. In addition, observations leading to
innovations and/or deviations (observations minus the model-simulated values
determined from the first-guess fields) exceeding 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were also omitted for the stability of the DA
optimization step.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS3">
  <label>2.2.3</label><title>Background error covariance</title>
      <p id="d1e2494">Similar to Jiang13, the background error covariance (BEC) statistics for each
analysis variable required by the 3DVAR algorithm were computed by utilizing
the National Meteorological Center (NMC) method (Parrish and Derber, 1992) based on the 1 month WRF/Chem forecast for
January 2015. No cross-correlation between different species was considered.
The standard deviations and horizontal–vertical correlation length scales of
the background errors (separated for each aerosol species) were calculated
using the method described by Wu et al. (2002). These data were used as constraints for the
distributions of the PM components. It is important to have
phenomena-specific background error statistics to allow for an appropriate
adjustment of individual species. The domain-averaged standard deviations of
the background errors for six aerosol species (BC, OC, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and OIN) in the
first three size bins are shown in Fig. 1 as a function of the vertical model
level; CL and NA are not shown here because they are excessively small
relative to the other PM species. By using the MOSAIC aerosol scheme, the
characteristics of different aerosol species in different size bins are more
appropriate for the region of China in the model. As shown in Fig. 1, the
standard deviations of different aerosol species errors are different in the
three size bins, the errors of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, OIN and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are relatively larger than those of the other species
in the three size bins, and OC is also important, especially in the second
(0.1–1.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and third (1.0–2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) size
bins. The larger background errors of those species allowed the
field to be better adjusted, which was crucial for the aerosol analyses in
this study.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page7416?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Experimental design</title>
      <p id="d1e2595">We conducted two sets of experiments (NO_DA and CONC_DA) for January 2015,
2016 and 2017. In both cases, the MEIC_2010 emission inventory was used. The
NO_DA experiment initialized a new WRF/Chem forecast every 6 h starting at
00:00 UTC on 20 December of the previous year to spin up the aerosol fields and
was run through 23:00 UTC on 31 January. Only the simulations in January were
used for the analysis. In the NO_DA experiment, the chemical and aerosol fields
were simply carried over from cycle to cycle (similar to a continuous aerosol
forecast), while the meteorological initial condition/boundary condition (IC/BC) were updated from GFS analysis data
every 6 h to prevent the meteorological simulation from drifting. For
CONC_DA, the GSI 3DVAR system updated the MOSAIC aerosol variables every
hour starting from 00:00 UTC on 1 January. The background of the first cycle at
00:00 UTC on 1 January was obtained from the NO_DA experiment, and all
subsequent cycles were derived from the previous cycle's 1 h forecast. In
CONC_DA, the GFS analysis data were interpolated from a 6 h frequency to a
1 h frequency and were then used to update the meteorological IC/BC in each
1 h cycle. The newly added heterogeneous reactions were activated in both
sets of experiments.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Distinguishing the impacts of meteorological conditions and
emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e2606">As introduced in Sect. 1, interannual air quality changes are strongly
influenced by both emissions and meteorological conditions. It is challenging
to distinguish and quantify the impacts of these two aspects solely based on
observations or modeling. In our case, the impacts of meteorological
conditions are diagnosed by analyzing the differences between two sets of
modeling simulations (with the same emission inventory but different
meteorology conditions). For NO_DA, the emission inputs for January of the
3 years (2015–2017) were all from the MEIC_2010 emission inventory, and
the only differences among the simulations of these 3 months were the
meteorological conditions, which were acquired from the GFS 6 h analysis
data. Therefore, we can assume that the differences in the simulated NO_DA
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the 3 months were driven purely by
differences in the meteorological conditions (similar to Xu et al., 2017).
However, it is difficult to distinguish the impacts of emissions by using the
same approach. As temporary emission control measures were applied according
to the pollution severity (alarm level), the emission reduction ratios
actually continued to change during the winter season; thus, no exact
emission reduction ratios were provided for those days. Nevertheless, the
simulation approach with different emission scenarios is simply impossible
when lacking exact emission reduction ratios. Instead, we subtracted the
meteorological effects from the total effects by utilizing the reanalysis
data and pure model simulations. The CONC_DA result, in which the hourly
surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations from 531 groups of sites were utilized,
can be treated as a reanalysis dataset that reflects the actual conditions
(very close to the observations). Therefore, the differences in the
assimilated CONC_DA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the 3 months
reflect the combined effects of both meteorological conditions and emissions.
As the two experiments were generated on gridded aerosol fields, we can
separate the effects of emissions from the collective effect by subtracting
the NO_DA differences from the CONC_DA differences. Hence, we can better
comprehend how meteorological conditions and emissions play different roles
in driving the changes in the 3 years. Table 2 illustrates this
approach by taking 2015 and 2016 as an example. However, some uncertainties
might be associated with this approach, as discussed in detail in
Sect. 4.2.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2645">The approach used to distinguish the different impacts of
meteorological conditions and emissions by calculating them from different
scenarios (taking 2015 and 2016 as an example).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="113.811024pt"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="150.799606pt"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="199.169291pt"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Assimilated total changes (A)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CONC_DA_ 2016-CONC_ DA_ 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Reflecting the combined effect of all driving factors, e.g., emissions and meteorological conditions, from 2015 to 2016</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated changes due to <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>meteorological differences (B)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NO_DA_2016-NO_DA_2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">As NO_DA_2015 and NO_DA_2016 were conducted with the same emissions but different meteorological conditions, the differences reflect the effects due to meteorological differences from 2015 to 2016</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Calculated changes due to <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>emission differences <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> (A–B)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(CONC_DA_2016-CONC_DA_2015) – <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(NO_DA_2016-NO_DA_2015)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Mostly reflecting the effects from emission differences between 2015 and 2016</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Evaluation of the assimilated {$\protect\chem{PM_{{2.5}}}$}}?><title>Evaluation of the assimilated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></title>
      <p id="d1e2734">This section presents the results from the NO_DA and assimilation
experiments outlined above. In slight contrast to S12 and Jiang13, our
purpose was to reproduce the spatio-temporal variations in the surface
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> within the reanalysis dataset rather than to provide the inorganic carbon
(IC) of aerosol fields for improving forecasts.</p>
      <p id="d1e2748">Figure 3 shows the observed and modeled monthly averages of the surface
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for January 2015, 2016 and 2017. Nine regions are illustrated
as rectangles in the figure: the North China Plain (NCP), northeastern China
(NEC), the Energy Golden Triangle (EGT), Xinjiang (XJ), the Fenwei Plain (FWP),
the Sichuan Basin (SB), central China (CC), the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) and the Pearl
River Delta (PRD). Both the observations and the model show that high values
are mostly observed in NCP, FWP, SB and CC. In the NO_DA case, the model
results are overpredicted in SB, NCP and CC for all 3 months, while the
overestimations are more severe in SB. The NO_DA case generally
overestimates (underestimates) the surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in NCP, SB and CC
(XJ and FWP) in the 3 years, potentially indicating that the 2010
emissions are not appropriate for the 2015–2017 simulations with
overestimations (underestimations). As discussed in Sect. 2.1, the large
area of overestimation is consistent with the national reductions in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> anthropogenic
emissions (Zheng et al., 2018); however, the underestimations in XJ and FWP
also indicate the introduction of new emission sources to these two regions.</p>
      <p id="d1e2806">Compared to the NO_DA case, the CONC_DA assimilation experiment effectively
reproduces the spatial distribution of surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the 3 months in terms of the relatively higher values observed in NCP, SB and CC
and in some “hotspots” (NEC, FWP and XJ), which are closer to the
observations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2823">Time series of the statistics between the model simulations and
observations. Red lines are CONC_DA minus observations, and blue lines are NO_DA
minus observations. Statistics include the number of data pairs for
comparison, the MEAN (mean bias), the SD (standard deviation) and the RMSE (root-mean-square error). On the left is 2015, in the middle is 2016 and on the right is 2017 (units are
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for MEAN, SD and RMSE).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e2852">Basic statistical measures, including the bias (BIAS), standard deviation
(SD), root-mean-square error (RMSE) and<?pagebreak page7417?> correlation coefficient (CORR),
were applied to evaluate the experiments. Figure 4 shows the time series of
the BIAS, SD and RMSE for all the data used in the entire domain. The
statistics were calculated for each 1 h DA cycle. After quality control, the
number of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations used in the DA process differed; the
number of observations was normally approximately 500–520 but reached a
minimum of 320–450 occasionally due to the data availability. From the time
series, we can see that the BIAS, SD and RMSE are greatly improved in the
CONC_DA case. The maximum BIAS values are approximately
50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for January 2015 and approximately
80 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for 2016 and 2017 in NO_DA, while they are reduced
to approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in CONC_DA. The SD and RMSE
are also reduced by at least 50 % most of the time.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2939">Spatial distributions of the statistics between the model
simulations and observations for January 2015. On the top is NO_DA vs. observations,
and on the bottom is CONC_DA vs. observations. BIAS is the model minus observation <bold>(a, d)</bold>, RMSE is the root-mean-square error <bold>(b, e)</bold> and CORR is the correlation coefficient (<bold>c, f</bold>; units are
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for BIAS and RMSE).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f05.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e2977">Figure 5 shows the spatial distributions of the error statistics (BIAS, RMSE
and CORR) at each observational site (with more than two-thirds valid data in the
month) in January 2015, 2016 and 2017. We start with 2015 and then address
the differences with comparisons in 2016 and 2017. In 2015 in the NO_DA
case, the surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are generally overestimated
by 20–60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in eastern China (NCP, SB, CC, PRD and YRD)
but are underestimated in NEC, FWP, EGT and especially XJ. The high and low BIAS
values in eastern and western China are greatly corrected in CONC_DA. Consistent
with the BIAS changes in CONC_DA, the RMSE and CORR distributions in<?pagebreak page7418?> eastern
China and NEC are also greatly improved; the RMSE is reduced by at least
50 %, and the CORR increases to almost above 0.8–0.9. The inhomogeneous
distributions of the BIAS in NO_DA in 2016 and 2017 are very similar to
those in 2015 (overestimated in eastern China but underestimated in NEC, EGT and
XJ). However, the high biases in CC and PRD and the low biases in XJ are even
larger in 2016 and 2017. Similar to the comparisons between NO_ DA and
CONC_DA for the year 2015, improvements are generally achieved for almost
all the regions in both 2016 and 2017. The statistics for the nine regions are
listed in Table 3.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3014">Statistics of the observed and model-simulated surface
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for January 2015, 2016 and 2017 in nine regions (units
are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for BIAS and RMSE).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Statistics</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sites</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pairs of data</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">BIAS </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">RMSE </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center">CORR </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NO_DA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CONC_DA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">NO_DA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">CONC_DA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">NO_DA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">CONC_DA</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col9">2015 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NCP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46 699</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">68.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 910</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.94</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">49.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">21.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EGT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19 516</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">60.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">19.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.90</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 243</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">53.76</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">71.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">19.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 819</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">56.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">23.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">33 456</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">98.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">125.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">20.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">34 153</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">46.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">81.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">21.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23 698</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">32.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">59.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 940</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">47.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col9">2016 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NCP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46 699</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">20.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">57.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">20.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 910</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">40.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EGT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19 516</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">39.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.90</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 243</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">72.92</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">98.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">27.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 819</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.51</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">26.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">33 456</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">134.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">165.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">34 153</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">86.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">109.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">18.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23 698</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">46.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 940</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">74.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.91</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col9">2017 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NCP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46 699</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">25.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">82.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">28.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 910</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">53.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">21.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EGT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19 516</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26.88</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">48.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.90</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 243</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">95.92</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">125.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">35.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 819</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.78</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">89.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">33 456</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">122.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">149.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">20.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">34 153</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">101.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">132.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">19.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23 698</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">78.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">12.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 940</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">35.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">61.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Interannual changes during 2015 through 2017</title>
      <p id="d1e4133">Given reliable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reanalysis fields produced by assimilating
surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (CONC_DA), the changes in the 3 years can be
analyzed for not only scattered observational sites but also for different
regions. To distinguish the roles of meteorological conditions and emissions
in driving these changes, an analysis based on the NO_DA and CONC_DA
simulations is performed. As assumed in Sect. 2.4, meteorology-driven
changes can be analyzed in the NO_DA simulations with different
meteorological conditions but the same emission inventory for different
years; however, the changes in the reanalysis data in different years are
actually the combination of all the driving forces, including meteorological
conditions and emissions. By analyzing both sets of simulations, we can
attempt to distinguish the roles of meteorology and emissions in determining
these changes.</p>
<?pagebreak page7419?><sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Spatial distribution</title>
      <p id="d1e4165">The monthly mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> differences for January in the 3 years
(2015–2017) are shown in Fig. 6 in terms of the surface concentrations
measured at observational sites (Fig. 6a) and those from assimilation
experiments (Fig. 6b). The surface observations are mostly reduced from 2015
to 2016, except for a few sites in the southern parts of NCP and FWP and in
XJ. For the changes from 2016 to 2017, the surface observations increase at
almost all the sites, especially at the sites in the southern part of NCP; the
only exceptions are the sites along the coastline in YRD. The assimilated
(CONC_DA) differences are consistent with the surface observations insomuch
that the decreasing trend from 2015 to 2016 and the increasing trend from
2016 to 2017 for most of the regions are reproduced. However, for the changes
in Tibet, EGT and XJ, where observational sites are sparse, some “cold
spots” were artificially generated by CONC_DA due to the scarcity of data
and the horizontal length scale set in the assimilation. As already shown in
Fig. 3 and indicated here again, January 2016 is the cleanest month in the
3 years.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e4181">Observed and modeled ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration changes
for January 2016–2015 (left), 2017–2016 (middle) and 2017–2015 (right);
<bold>(a)</bold> observations, <bold>(b)</bold> assimilated total changes,
<bold>(c)</bold> modeled changes due to meteorological conditions and
<bold>(d)</bold> calculated changes due to emissions (units:
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>The roles of meteorological conditions and emissions</title>
      <?pagebreak page7421?><p id="d1e4242">The surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations from both the observations and the assimilation experiments
show decreases from 2015 to 2016 but increases from 2016 to 2017 for most of
the regions in eastern China (Fig. 6). The Chinese government has been
implementing a strict emission control strategy since 2013, especially in northern China; thus, emission reductions are expected for each year following 2013. The
ambient response from 2015–2017 is contradictory if considering only the
reductions in emissions and omitting the changes in meteorological
conditions. There are two possible assumptions: the first is that the
emission reduction target was not achieved from 2016 to 2017, and the second
is that other factors in addition to emissions played more important roles.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e4259">Modeled ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration changes for
2016–2015, 2017–2016 and 2017–2015 in nine regions, and the contributions of
the meteorology (MET) and emissions (EMIS) calculated according to Table 2
(units: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">2016–2015 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">2017–2016 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col10" align="center">2017–2015 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">MET</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">EMIS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">MET</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">EMIS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">MET</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">EMIS</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NCP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.52</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.91</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20.09</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.44</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.61</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EGT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23.37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.86</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.81</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.57</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.54</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.47</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.29</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.73</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36.54</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34.09</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">46.54</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.52</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.88</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.92</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36.50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.77</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17.67</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e5314">Modeled meteorological changes for 2016–2015 (left), 2017–2016
(middle) and 2017–2015 (right). <bold>(a)</bold> PBLH, <bold>(b)</bold> PSFC,
<bold>(c)</bold> T2, <bold>(d)</bold> RH2 and <bold>(e)</bold> 10 m wind speed.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=327.206693pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/7409/2019/acp-19-7409-2019-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5339">The NO_DA differences in the different years are shown in Fig. 6c, which
reflects the effect of meteorological condition changes (Sect. 2.4). The
effect due to emissions (the other major factor in addition to meteorological
conditions) is given by subtracting the NO_DA differences from the CONC_DA
differences (Fig. 6d). We can clearly see that the meteorology played two
different roles from 2016 to 2017. It caused a decrease in the ambient
concentrations for northern China (NCP and NEC) from 2015 to 2016 but induced
a large increase for northern and central China (CC) from 2016 to 2017. This
indicates that the meteorological conditions might have differed from 2016 to
2017. After considering the impacts of meteorological conditions, those of
emission reductions are still confirmed for these two regions from 2016 to
2017. The contributions from both meteorological conditions and emissions in
the nine regions (defined in Fig. 3) were calculated, and the results are listed
in Table 4. The calculations show a reduction of approximately
15–20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the month of January from
2015 to 2016 in northern China (NCP and NEC), but the meteorology played a
dominant role (contributing a reduction of approximately
12–21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The changes from 2016 to 2017 in
NCP and NEC are completely different; meteorological conditions caused an
increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of approximately 12–23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and emission control measures caused a decrease of 1–8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, while the combined effects still showed a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
increase for that region. It is reasonable to say that emissions were indeed
reduced for the northern regions from 2016 to 2017. However, the meteorology
played an important role in offsetting those emission reductions and leading
to an increase in surface concentrations in 2017.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e5482">Statistics of the meteorological differences by region for January
2015, 2016 and 2017.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.88}[.88]?><oasis:tgroup cols="16">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="14" colname="col14" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="15" colname="col15" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="16" colname="col16" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">PBLH (meter) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">PSFC (Pa) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col10" align="center" colsep="1">T2 (degree) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col11" nameend="col13" align="center" colsep="1">RH2 (%) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col14" nameend="col16" align="center">WS10 (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2016–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2016–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2016–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2016–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2016–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">2017–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">2017–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">2015</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NCP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">138.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">108.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">5.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">8.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">1.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.78</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.37</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">58.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">117.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">58.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">58.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">4.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">3.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.57</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EGT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">28.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">19.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">4.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">10.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">151.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">43.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">108.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.22</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">67.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">64.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">52.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">1.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.06</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">3.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.41</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">34.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">82.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">53.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">10.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">11.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.53</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">64.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">42.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">77.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">49.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">7.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">10.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.49</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">76.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">11.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">3.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">0.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">0.46</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e6594">It is worth noting that there are uncertainties in the
simulation–assimilation processes. There are three sources of uncertainties
in the NO_DA simulation. First, the emission inventories in the NO_DA
simulations are obviously not accurate, which may introduce uncertainties
into the analysis. Although the basic assumption required only that the
emissions stay the same throughout the 3 years, emission inventory
uncertainty-induced errors would be offset in the subtraction process when
calculating the year-to-year differences. However, it did generate
uncertainties. For example, the emissions in SB, CC and PRD were generally
overestimated (Fig. 3), which means that the variations in the ambient
concentration might have been artificially amplified considering the
meteorology impacts (Fig. 6c). In contrast, the emissions in XJ and FWP were
underestimated (Fig. 3), and thus the changes in the ambient concentrations
due to meteorological conditions in these two regions might have diminished.
From this point of view, if the fixed emissions are more accurate in those
years, the results would be more reliable. In the case where “real”
emissions are not available and the purpose is to evaluate the contribution
of those emissions, uncertainties are unavoidable and should be
emphasized carefully. Second, the meteorological IC/BC conditions in the
NO_DA simulations, which were obtained from GFS 6 h analysis data, also
have uncertainties. The biases in meteorological conditions might lead to
uncertainties in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> analysis. Third, the deficiencies
associated with the chemistry in the model also generate uncertainties,
including missing reactions and the inaccurate parameterization of reactions.
These three aspects all originate from the imperfections of current forward
models. From another perspective, the accuracy of the CONC_DA assimilation
experiment also affects the analysis. For example, the assimilation
artificially made some “cold spots” in Tibet, EGT and XJ, where
observational sites are sparse; this could also induce biases. Finally, the
contribution of aerosol–meteorology feedback was not considered in our
calculations. As noted by Gao et al. (2017), reduced aerosol feedbacks due to
emission reductions accounted for approximately 10.9 % of the total
decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in urban Beijing in their
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
study. In our current approach, this effect is integrated into the emissions
in the subtracting process.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Meteorological changes in 2016 and 2017</title>
      <p id="d1e6627">It is interesting to see that meteorology played different roles in each of
the 3 years. Here, we compared some meteorological parameters to explain
the impacts of the meteorology. Differences in the monthly mean planetary
boundary-layer height (PBLH), surface pressure (PSFC), 2 m temperature (T2),
2 m relative humidity (RH2) and 10 m wind speed in different years are
given in Fig. 7. The statistics of the differences in these parameters in the
nine regions are listed in Table 5, which shows that the changes in the PSFC and
T2 for the periods 2015–2016 and 2016–2017 are different over the whole
region. Comparing the parameters between 2015 and 2016, the pressure system
is stronger, the temperature is lower and the wind speed is larger in most
regions in 2016; these conditions are favorable for the dispersion of
pollution. However, there are some unfavorable conditions, including a lower
PBLH and a higher relative humidity (RH; and thus more heterogeneous reactions with the high
RH) in northern and southern China, which may offset the impacts of high-pressure systems and low temperatures. Therefore, the combined impacts of
these meteorological parameters caused a decrease in the ambient
concentration in northern China and an increase in southern China from 2015
to 2016, as shown in Fig. 6. The meteorological changes are different from
2016 to 2017, with a weaker pressure system, higher temperature, smaller wind
speed and lower PBLH in most regions, which caused the pollution to
accumulate. As suggested by recent studies, climate change has had important
impacts on<?pagebreak page7422?> extreme haze events in northern China based on historical
statistical approaches or climate models. Those studies (e.g., Li et al.,
2016; Zuo et al., 2015)
revealed that wintertime fog–haze days across central and eastern China have
a close relationship with the East Asian winter monsoon; in addition,
significant weakening of the Siberian high and East Asian trough are closely
correlated with warm events which boost air pollution. Consistent with our
study, Zhao et al. (2018) noted that a stronger Siberian high period in
January 2016 produced a significant decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations relative to those during weaker periods in other years. The
abovementioned studies emphasized that climate change factors and the impacts
of emission changes are still difficult to evaluate. Our study used the DA
technique in combination with regional models and surface observations to
distinguish the impacts of emissions and meteorological conditions to further
investigate the year-to-year changes at the regional scale.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e6651">To analyze the complex <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution in China, the GSI–WRF/Chem
aerosol data assimilation system was updated from the GOCART aerosol scheme
to the MOSAIC-4BIN scheme, which is more appropriate for characterizing
anthropogenic emission-relevant aerosol species. Three years (2015–2017) of
wintertime (January) surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations from more than 1600 sites
were assimilated hourly using the updated 3DVAR system in the CONC_DA
assimilation experiment. A parallel control experiment that did not employ DA
(NO_DA) was also performed.</p>
      <p id="d1e6676">Both the control and the assimilation experiments were evaluated against the
surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations. In the NO_DA experiment, in which the
2010_MEIC emission inventory was used, the modeled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were
severely overestimated in the Sichuan Basin (SB), central China (CC), the Yangtze
River Delta (YRD) and the Pearl River Delta (PRD) by 98–134, 46–101, 32–59
and 19–60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, which indicated that the
emission estimates for 2010 are not appropriate for 2015–2017, as strict
emission control strategies were implemented in recent years. Meanwhile,
underestimations of 11–12, 53–96, and 22–40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were
observed in NEC, XJ and EGT, respectively. The assimilation experiment significantly
reduced the high biases of surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in SB, CC, YRD and PRD
and the low biases in NEC and XJ with biases within
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page7424?><p id="d1e6783">Both the observation and the assimilation experiments showed decreasing
ambient concentrations from 2015 to 2016 but increasing concentrations from
2016 to 2017 for most of the regions. To distinguish the important factors
driving these changes, the reanalysis data from the assimilation experiment
and the modeling results from the control experiment were analyzed. The
results showed a reduction in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of approximately
15–20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the month of January from 2015 to 2016 in
northern China (NCP and NEC), but meteorology played the dominant role
(contributing approximately 12–21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reduction). The changes from 2016 to 2017 in NCP and NEC were
different; meteorological conditions caused an increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
approximately 12–23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, while emission control measures
caused a decrease of 1–8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the combined effects
still showed a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increase for that region. The analysis
confirmed that meteorology played different roles in 2016 and 2017: the
higher pressure system, lower temperatures and higher PBLH in 2016 (compared
with 2015) were favorable for pollution dispersion, whereas the situation was
almost the opposite in 2017 (compared with 2016) and led to an increased
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 2016 to 2017, although emission control strategies were
implemented in both years. After considering the impacts of the meteorology,
the analysis showed that emissions were indeed reduced from 2015 to 2016 and
2017, especially in NCP for the year 2017 (although the surface
concentrations increased that year). The analysis also showed that emissions
increased in XJ and FWP.</p>
      <p id="d1e6923">There are still large uncertainties in this approach, such as the
deficiencies of forward models (including inaccurate emission inputs,
uncertainties in the meteorological IC/BC and the chemistry mechanism) and
the assimilation process, and the imperfection of the aerosol–meteorology
feedbacks in the model simulation generated large biases in the analysis.
The most straightforward approach is thus to directly estimate the emissions
by data assimilation, which will be the topic of a separate study.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e6930">The observational data is public available from <uri>http://www.cnemc.cn</uri>,
last access: 7 May 2019. The simulation data may be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e6936">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7409-2019-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7409-2019-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e6945">ZL and DC designed research, DC performed research, JB contributed towards
development of DA system, MC provided funds, PZ provided observational data,
and DC wrote the paper, with contributions from all co-authors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e6951">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e6957">This work was supported by the National Key R&amp;D Program on Monitoring,
Early Warning and Prevention of Major Natural Disasters under grant
2017YFC1501406, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no.
41807312), and the Basic R&amp;D special fund for central scientific research
institutes (IUMKYSZHJ201701). NCAR is sponsored by the US National Science
Foundation.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e6962">This research has been supported by the National Key R&amp;D
Program on Monitoring,
Early Warning and Prevention of Major Natural Disasters (grant no. 2017YFC1501406), the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (grant no. 41807312), and the Basic R&amp;D special fund for central-level scientific
research institutes (grant no. IUMKYSZHJ201701).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e6968">This paper was edited by Chul Han Song and reviewed by two
anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Chen, D., Liu, Z., Fast, J., and Ban, J.: Simulations of
sulfate–nitrate–ammonium (SNA) aerosols during the extreme haze events over
northern China in October 2014, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10707–10724,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10707-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-10707-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, F. and Dudhia, J.: Coupling an advanced land surface-hydrology model
with the Penn State-NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation
and sensitivity, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 569–585, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Cheng, Y., Zheng, G., Wei, C., Mu, Q., Zheng, B., Wang, Z., Gao, M., Zhang,
Q., He, K., Carmichael, G., Poschl, U., and Su, H.: Reactive nitrogen
chemistry in aerosol water as a source of sulfate during haze events in
China, Sci. Adv., 2, e1601530, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.1601530</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Chin, M., Savoie, D. L., Huebert, B. J., Bandy, A. R., Thornton, D. C.,
Bates, T. S., Quinn, P. K., Saltzman, E. S., and De Bruyn, W. J.: Atmospheric
sulfur cycle simulated in the global model GOCART: Comparison with field
observations and regional budgets, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105,
24689–24712, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900385" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000jd900385</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kinne, S., Torres, O., Holben, B. N., Duncan, B. N.,
Martin, R. V., Logan, J. A., Higurashi, A., and Nakajima, T.: Tropospheric
aerosol optical thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with
satellite and Sun photometer measurements, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 461–483,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;0461:Taotft&gt;2.0.Co;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;0461:Taotft&gt;2.0.Co;2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>China National Environmental Monitoring Center: Ambient Air Quality Monthly
Report 2015-01/2016-01/2017-01, available at:
<uri>http://www.cnemc.cn/jcbg/kqzlzkbg/</uri>, last access: 17 May 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>China National Environmental Monitoring Center: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
Auto-Monitoring Instrument Technical Standard and Requirement, Beijing, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Chou, M.-D. and Suarez, M. J.: An efficient thermal infrared radiation
parameterization for use in general circulation models,<?pagebreak page7425?> NASA Tech. Memo., TM
104606, vol. 3, 25 pp., NASA Goddard Space Flight Cent., Greenbelt, Md.,
1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Collins, W. D., Rasch, P. J., Eaton, B. E., Khattatov, B. V., Lamarque, J.
F., and Zender, C. S.: Simulating aerosols using a chemical transport model
with assimilation of satellite aerosol retrievals: Methodology for INDOEX, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 7313–7336, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900507" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000jd900507</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Elbern, H., Strunk, A., Schmidt, H., and Talagrand, O.: Emission rate and
chemical state estimation by 4-dimensional variational inversion, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 7, 3749–3769, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3749-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-3749-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Fast, J. D., Gustafson, W. I., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R. A., Barnard, J. C.,
Chapman, E. G., Grell, G. A., and Peckham, S. E.: Evolution of ozone,
particulates, and aerosol direct radiative forcing in the vicinity of Houston
using a fully coupled meteorology-chemistry-aerosol model, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 111, D21305, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006721" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005jd006721</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Gao, M., Liu, Z., Wang, Y., Lu, X., Ji, D., Wang, L., Li, M., Wang, Z.,
Zhang, Q., and Carmichael, G. R.: Distinguishing the roles of meteorology,
emission control measures, regional transport, and co-benefits of reduced
aerosol feedbacks in “APEC Blue”, Atmos. Environ., 167, 476–486,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.054" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.054</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Grell, G. A. and Devenyi, D.: A generalized approach to parameterizing
convection combining ensemble and data assimilation techniques, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 29, 1693, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002gl015311" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002gl015311</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within the
WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Han, B., Zhang, R., Yang, W., Bai, Z., Ma, Z., and Zhang, W.: Heavy air
pollution episodes in Beijing during January 2013: inorganic ion chemistry
and source analysis using Highly Time-Resolved Measurements in an urban site,
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 15, 11111–11141,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-15-11111-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acpd-15-11111-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
He, K. B.: Multi-resolution emission Inventory for China (MEIC): model
framework and 1990–2010 anthropogenic emissions, Presented on the
international Global Atmospheric Chemistry Conference, 17–21 September,
Beijing, China, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Hong, C., Zhang, Q., He, K., Guan, D., Li, M., Liu, F., and Zheng, B.:
Variations of China's emission estimates: response to uncertainties in energy
statistics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 1227–1239,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1227-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-1227-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, S. Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with
an explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134,
2318–2341, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Jiang, Z.,  Liu, Z.,  Wang,  T.,  Schwartz, C. S., Lin, H.-C.,  and  Jiang, F.: Probing
into the impact of 3DVAR assimilation of surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observations over China
using process analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 6738–6749,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50495" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50495</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Krotkov, N. A., McLinden, C. A., Li, C., Lamsal, L. N., Celarier, E. A.,
Marchenko, S. V., Swartz, W. H., Bucsela, E. J., Joiner, J., Duncan, B. N.,
Boersma, K. F., Veefkind, J. P., Levelt, P. F., Fioletov, V. E., Dickerson,
R. R., He, H., Lu, Z., and Streets, D. G.: Aura OMI observations of regional
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution changes from 2005 to 2015, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 4605–4629, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4605-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-4605-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Liu, J., Han, Y., Tang, X., Zhu, J., and Zhu, T.: Estimating adult mortality
attributable to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in China with assimilated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations based on a ground monitoring network, Sci.
Total Environ., 568, 1253–1262, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Liu, Z. Q., Liu, Q. H., Lin, H. C., Schwartz, C. S., Lee, Y. H., and Wang, T.
J.: Three-dimensional variational assimilation of MODIS aerosol optical
depth: Implementation and application to a dust storm over East Asia, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D23206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011jd016159" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011jd016159</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., He, K. B., and Streets, D. G.: Primary anthropogenic
aerosol emission trends for China, 1990–2005, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
931–954, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-931-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-931-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Li, M., Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., He, K. B., Cheng, Y. F., Emmons, L. K.,
Huo, H., Kang, S. C., Lu, Z., Shao, M., Su, H., Yu, X., and Zhang, Y.:
Mapping Asian anthropogenic emissions of non-methane volatile organic
compounds to multiple chemical mechanisms, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
5617–5638, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-5617-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-5617-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Li, Q., Zhang, R. H., and Wang, Y.: Interannual variation of the wintertime
fog-haze days across central and eastern China and its relation with East
Asian winter monsoon, Int. J. Climatol., 36, 346–354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4350" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.4350</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Li, G., Bei, N., Cao, J., Huang, R., Wu, J., Feng, T., Wang, Y., Liu, S.,
Zhang, Q., Tie, X., and Molina, L. T.: A possible pathway for rapid growth of
sulfate during haze days in China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 3301–3316,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-3301-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-3301-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Ling, Z., Huang, T., Zhao, Y., Li, J., Zhang, X., Wang, J., Lian, L., Mao, X., Gao, H.,
and Ma, J.: OMI-measured increasing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions due to energy industry expansion and
relocation in northwestern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9115–9131, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9115-2017, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>McKeen, S. A., Wotawa, G., Parrish, D. D., Holloway, J. S., Buhr, M. P.,
Hubler, G., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Meagher, J. F.: Ozone production from
Canadian wildfires during June and July of 1995, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
107, 4192, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd000697" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001jd000697</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S.
A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated
correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
16663–16682, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Moch, J. M., Dovrou, E., Mickley, L. J., Keutsch, F. N., Cheng, Y., Jacob, D.
J., Jiang, J. K., Li, M., Munger, J. W., Qiao, X. H., and Zhang, Q.:
Contribution of Hydroxymethane Sulfonate to Ambient Particulate Matter: A
Potential Explanation for High Particulate Sulfur During Severe Winter Haze
in Beijing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 11969–11979, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl079309" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018gl079309</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Pagowski, M., Grell, G. A., McKeen, S. A., Peckham, S. E., and Devenyi, D.:
Three dimensional variational data assimilation of ozone and fine particulate
matter observations: some results using the Weather Research and
Forecasting-Chemistry model and Grid-point Statistical Interpolation, Q. J.
Roy. Meteor. Soc., 136, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.700, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Parrish, D. F. and Derber, J. C.: The National-Meteorological-Centers Spectral
Statistical-Interpolation Analysis System,<?pagebreak page7426?> Mon. Weather Rev., 120, 1747–1763,
doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:Tnmcss&gt;2.0.Co;2, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Schwartz, C. S.,  Liu,  Z.,  Lin, H. C.,  and  McKeen, S. A.: Simultaneous
three-dimensional variational assimilation of surface fine particulate matter
and MODIS aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017383, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Shao, J., Chen, Q., Wang, Y., Lu, X., He, P., Sun, Y., Shah, V., Martin, R.
V., Philip, S., Song, S., Zhao, Y., Xie, Z., Zhang, L., and Alexander, B.:
Heterogeneous sulfate aerosol formation mechanisms during wintertime Chinese
haze events: Air quality model assessment using observations of sulfate
oxygen isotopes in Beijing, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2018-1352" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2018-1352</ext-link>, in review, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Sun, Y. L., Wang, Z. F., Du, W., Zhang, Q., Wang, Q. Q., Fu, P. Q., Pan, X.
L., Li, J., Jayne, J., and Worsnop, D. R.: Long-term real-time measurements
of aerosol particle composition in Beijing, China: seasonal variations,
meteorological effects, and source analysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15,
10149–10165, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10149-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-10149-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
The Central People's Government of the People Republic of China: Guiding
Opinions on Promoting the Joint Prevention and Control of Air Pollution to
Improve Regional Air Quality, Beijing, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
The Central People's Government of the People Republic of China: Atmospheric
Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Levy Zamora, M., Hu, M., Lin,
Y., Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang,
Y., Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P.,
Marrero-Ortiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L., Shao,
M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B., Cai, L.,
Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R. A., Kolb,
C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog to
Chinese haze, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 13630–13635,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1616540113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Wang, G., Zhang, F., Peng, J., Duan, L., Ji, Y., Marrero-Ortiz, W., Wang, J.,
Li, J., Wu, C., Cao, C., Wang, Y., Zheng, J., Secrest, J., Li, Y., Wang, Y.,
Li, H., Li, N., and Zhang, R.: Particle acidity and sulfate production during
severe haze events in China cannot be reliably inferred by assuming a mixture
of inorganic salts, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 10123–10132,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-10123-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-10123-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Wang, L. T., Wei, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, F. F., Su, J., Meng, C. C.,
and Zhang, Q.: The 2013 severe haze over southern Hebei, China: model
evaluation, source apportionment, and policy implications, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 14, 3151–3173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Wang, W., Maenhaut, W., Yang, W., Liu, X. D., Bai, Z. P., Zhang, T., Claeys,
M., Cachier, H., Dong, S. P., and Wang, Y. L.: One-year aerosol
characterization study for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Beijing,
Atmos. Pollut. Res., 5, 554–562, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5094/Apr.2014.064" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5094/Apr.2014.064</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Y. S., Yao, L., Wang, L. L., Liu, Z. R., Ji, D. S., Tang, G. Q., Zhang,
J. K., Sun, Y., Hu, B., and Xin, J. Y.: Mechanism for the formation of the
January 2013 heavy haze pollution episode over central and eastern China,
Sci. China Earth Sci., 57, 14–25, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4773-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11430-013-4773-4</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Wild, O., Zhu, X., and Prather, M. J.: Fast-j: Accurate simulation of in- and
below-cloud photolysis in tropospheric chemical models, J. Atmos. Chem., 37,
245–282, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, W. S., Purser, R. J., and Parrish, D. F.: Three-dimensional variational
analysis with spatially inhomogeneous covariances, Mon. Weather Rev., 130,
2905–2916, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:Tdvaws&gt;2.0.Co;2, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Xu, J., Chang, L., Yan, F., and He, J.: Role of climate anomalies on decadal
variation in the occurrence of wintertime haze in the Yangtze River Delta,
China, Sci. Total Environ., 599–600, 918–925,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.015</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Yang, Y. R., Liu, X. G., Qu, Y., An, J. L., Jiang, R., Zhang, Y. H., Sun, Y.
L., Wu, Z. J., Zhang, F., Xu, W. Q., and Ma, Q. X.: Characteristics and
formation mechanism of continuous hazes in China: a case study during the
autumn of 2014 in the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 8165–8178,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-8165-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-8165-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Zaveri, R. A. and Peters, L. K.: A new lumped structure photochemical
mechanism for large-scale applications, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104,
30387–30415, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Zaveri, R. A., Easter, R. C., Fast, J. D., and Peters, L. K.: Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC), J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 113, D13204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008782" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007jd008782</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Shao, J., Lu, X., Zhao, Y., Hu, Y., Henze, D. K., Liao, H., Gong,
S., and Zhang, Q.: Sources and Processes Affecting Fine Particulate Matter
Pollution over North China: An Adjoint Analysis of the Beijing APEC Period,
Environ. Sci. Technol., 50, 8731–8740, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., He, K. B., Huo, H., Kannari,
A., Klimont, Z., Park, I. S., Reddy, S., Fu, J. S., Chen, D., Duan, L., Lei,
Y., Wang, L. T., and Yao, Z. L.: Asian emissions in 2006 for the NASA INTEX-B
mission, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5131–5153,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, S., Feng, T., Tie, X., Long, X., Li, G., Cao, J., Zhou, W., and An, Z.:
Impact of Climate Change on Siberian High and Wintertime Air Pollution in
China in Past Two Decades, Earth's Future, 6, 118–133,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000682" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017EF000682</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Zhou, Y. D., Qiu, L. P., and Zhang, J.: Quantifying the
uncertainties of China's emission inventory for industrial sources: From
national to provincial and city scales, Atmos. Environ., 165, 207–221,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.045" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.045</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Zhang, Y., He, K. B., Wang, K., Zheng, G. J., Duan, F.
K., Ma, Y. L., and Kimoto, T.: Heterogeneous chemistry: a mechanism missing
in current models to explain secondary inorganic aerosol formation during the
January 2013 haze episode in North China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2031–2049,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2031-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-2031-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., Li, H., Li, X.,
Peng, L., Qi, J., Yan, L., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zheng, Y., He, K., and Zhang,
Q.: Trends in China's anthropogenic emissions since 2010 as the consequence
of clean air actions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14095–14111,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018</ext-link>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Zhi, G. R., Zhang, Y. Y., Sun, J. Z., Cheng, M. M., Dang, H. Y., Liu, S. J.,
Yang, J. C., Zhang, Y. Z., Xue, Z. G., Li, S. Y., and Meng, F.: Village
energy survey reveals missing rural raw coal in northern China: Significance
in science and policy, Environ. Pollut., 223, 705–712,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.02.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envpol.2017.02.009</ext-link>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Zuo, Z. Y., Zhang, R. H., Huang, Y., Xiao, D., and Guo, D.: Extreme cold and
warm events over China in wintertime, Int. J. Climatol., 35, 3568–3581,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4229" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.4229</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Retrospective analysis of 2015–2017 wintertime PM<sub>2.5</sub> in China: response to emission regulations and the role of meteorology</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>To better characterize anthropogenic emission-relevant aerosol
species, the Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) and Weather Research and
Forecasting with Chemistry
(WRF/Chem) data assimilation system was updated from the
GOCART aerosol scheme to the Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC) 4-bin (MOSAIC-4BIN) aerosol scheme. Three years (2015–2017) of
wintertime (January) surface PM<sub>2.5</sub> (fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter smaller than 2.5&thinsp;µm) observations from more than 1600 sites
were assimilated hourly using the updated three-dimensional
variational (3DVAR) system. In the control
experiment (without assimilation) using Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China 2010 (MEIC_2010) emissions, the modeled
January averaged PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations were severely overestimated
in the Sichuan Basin, central China, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River
Delta by 98–134, 46–101, 32–59 and 19–60&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup>,
respectively, indicating that the emissions for 2010 are not appropriate for
2015–2017, as strict emission control strategies were implemented in recent
years. Meanwhile, underestimations of 11–12, 53–96 and
22–40&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup> were observed in northeastern China, Xinjiang
and the Energy Golden Triangle, respectively. The assimilation experiment
significantly reduced both high and low biases to within
±5&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup>.</p><p>The observations and the reanalysis data from the assimilation experiment
were used to investigate the year-to-year changes and the driving factors.
The role of emissions was obtained by subtracting the meteorological impacts
(by control experiments) from the total combined differences (by assimilation
experiments). The results show a reduction in PM<sub>2.5</sub> of
approximately 15&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup> for the month of January from 2015 to
2016 in the North China Plain (NCP), but meteorology played the dominant role
(contributing a reduction of approximately 12&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup>). The
change (for January) from 2016 to 2017 in NCP was different; meteorology
caused an increase in PM<sub>2.5</sub> of approximately
23&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup>, while emission control measures caused a decrease
of 8&thinsp;µg&thinsp;m<sup>−3</sup>, and the combined effects still showed a
PM<sub>2.5</sub> increase for that region. The analysis confirmed that
emission control strategies were indeed implemented and emissions were
reduced in both years. Using a data assimilation approach, this study helps
identify the reasons why emission control strategies may or may not have an
immediately visible impact. There are still large uncertainties in this
approach, especially the inaccurate emission inputs, and neglecting
aerosol–meteorology feedbacks in the model can generate large uncertainties
in the analysis as well.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, D., Liu, Z., Fast, J., and Ban, J.: Simulations of
sulfate–nitrate–ammonium (SNA) aerosols during the extreme haze events over
northern China in October 2014, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10707–10724,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10707-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10707-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, F. and Dudhia, J.: Coupling an advanced land surface-hydrology model
with the Penn State-NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation
and sensitivity, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 569–585, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Cheng, Y., Zheng, G., Wei, C., Mu, Q., Zheng, B., Wang, Z., Gao, M., Zhang,
Q., He, K., Carmichael, G., Poschl, U., and Su, H.: Reactive nitrogen
chemistry in aerosol water as a source of sulfate during haze events in
China, Sci. Adv., 2, e1601530, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Chin, M., Savoie, D. L., Huebert, B. J., Bandy, A. R., Thornton, D. C.,
Bates, T. S., Quinn, P. K., Saltzman, E. S., and De Bruyn, W. J.: Atmospheric
sulfur cycle simulated in the global model GOCART: Comparison with field
observations and regional budgets, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105,
24689–24712, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900385" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900385</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kinne, S., Torres, O., Holben, B. N., Duncan, B. N.,
Martin, R. V., Logan, J. A., Higurashi, A., and Nakajima, T.: Tropospheric
aerosol optical thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with
satellite and Sun photometer measurements, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 461–483,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;0461:Taotft&gt;2.0.Co;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;0461:Taotft&gt;2.0.Co;2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
China National Environmental Monitoring Center: Ambient Air Quality Monthly
Report 2015-01/2016-01/2017-01, available at:
<a href="http://www.cnemc.cn/jcbg/kqzlzkbg/" target="_blank">http://www.cnemc.cn/jcbg/kqzlzkbg/</a>, last access: 17 May 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
China National Environmental Monitoring Center: PM<sub>2.5</sub>
Auto-Monitoring Instrument Technical Standard and Requirement, Beijing, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Chou, M.-D. and Suarez, M. J.: An efficient thermal infrared radiation
parameterization for use in general circulation models, NASA Tech. Memo., TM
104606, vol. 3, 25 pp., NASA Goddard Space Flight Cent., Greenbelt, Md.,
1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Collins, W. D., Rasch, P. J., Eaton, B. E., Khattatov, B. V., Lamarque, J.
F., and Zender, C. S.: Simulating aerosols using a chemical transport model
with assimilation of satellite aerosol retrievals: Methodology for INDOEX, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 7313–7336, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900507" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900507</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Elbern, H., Strunk, A., Schmidt, H., and Talagrand, O.: Emission rate and
chemical state estimation by 4-dimensional variational inversion, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 7, 3749–3769, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3749-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3749-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Fast, J. D., Gustafson, W. I., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R. A., Barnard, J. C.,
Chapman, E. G., Grell, G. A., and Peckham, S. E.: Evolution of ozone,
particulates, and aerosol direct radiative forcing in the vicinity of Houston
using a fully coupled meteorology-chemistry-aerosol model, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 111, D21305, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006721" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006721</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Gao, M., Liu, Z., Wang, Y., Lu, X., Ji, D., Wang, L., Li, M., Wang, Z.,
Zhang, Q., and Carmichael, G. R.: Distinguishing the roles of meteorology,
emission control measures, regional transport, and co-benefits of reduced
aerosol feedbacks in “APEC Blue”, Atmos. Environ., 167, 476–486,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.054" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.054</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Grell, G. A. and Devenyi, D.: A generalized approach to parameterizing
convection combining ensemble and data assimilation techniques, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 29, 1693, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002gl015311" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002gl015311</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within the
WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Han, B., Zhang, R., Yang, W., Bai, Z., Ma, Z., and Zhang, W.: Heavy air
pollution episodes in Beijing during January 2013: inorganic ion chemistry
and source analysis using Highly Time-Resolved Measurements in an urban site,
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 15, 11111–11141,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-15-11111-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-15-11111-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
He, K. B.: Multi-resolution emission Inventory for China (MEIC): model
framework and 1990–2010 anthropogenic emissions, Presented on the
international Global Atmospheric Chemistry Conference, 17–21 September,
Beijing, China, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, C., Zhang, Q., He, K., Guan, D., Li, M., Liu, F., and Zheng, B.:
Variations of China's emission estimates: response to uncertainties in energy
statistics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 1227–1239,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1227-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1227-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, S. Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with
an explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134,
2318–2341, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Jiang, Z.,  Liu, Z.,  Wang,  T.,  Schwartz, C. S., Lin, H.-C.,  and  Jiang, F.: Probing
into the impact of 3DVAR assimilation of surface PM<sub>10</sub> observations over China
using process analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 6738–6749,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50495" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50495</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Krotkov, N. A., McLinden, C. A., Li, C., Lamsal, L. N., Celarier, E. A.,
Marchenko, S. V., Swartz, W. H., Bucsela, E. J., Joiner, J., Duncan, B. N.,
Boersma, K. F., Veefkind, J. P., Levelt, P. F., Fioletov, V. E., Dickerson,
R. R., He, H., Lu, Z., and Streets, D. G.: Aura OMI observations of regional
SO<sub>2</sub> and NO<sub>2</sub> pollution changes from 2005 to 2015, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 4605–4629, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4605-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4605-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, J., Han, Y., Tang, X., Zhu, J., and Zhu, T.: Estimating adult mortality
attributable to PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure in China with assimilated
PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations based on a ground monitoring network, Sci.
Total Environ., 568, 1253–1262, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, Z. Q., Liu, Q. H., Lin, H. C., Schwartz, C. S., Lee, Y. H., and Wang, T.
J.: Three-dimensional variational assimilation of MODIS aerosol optical
depth: Implementation and application to a dust storm over East Asia, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D23206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011jd016159" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011jd016159</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., He, K. B., and Streets, D. G.: Primary anthropogenic
aerosol emission trends for China, 1990–2005, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
931–954, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-931-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-931-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Li, M., Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., He, K. B., Cheng, Y. F., Emmons, L. K.,
Huo, H., Kang, S. C., Lu, Z., Shao, M., Su, H., Yu, X., and Zhang, Y.:
Mapping Asian anthropogenic emissions of non-methane volatile organic
compounds to multiple chemical mechanisms, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
5617–5638, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-5617-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-5617-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Li, Q., Zhang, R. H., and Wang, Y.: Interannual variation of the wintertime
fog-haze days across central and eastern China and its relation with East
Asian winter monsoon, Int. J. Climatol., 36, 346–354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4350" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4350</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Li, G., Bei, N., Cao, J., Huang, R., Wu, J., Feng, T., Wang, Y., Liu, S.,
Zhang, Q., Tie, X., and Molina, L. T.: A possible pathway for rapid growth of
sulfate during haze days in China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 3301–3316,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-3301-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-3301-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Ling, Z., Huang, T., Zhao, Y., Li, J., Zhang, X., Wang, J., Lian, L., Mao, X., Gao, H.,
and Ma, J.: OMI-measured increasing SO<sub>2</sub> emissions due to energy industry expansion and
relocation in northwestern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9115–9131, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9115-2017, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
McKeen, S. A., Wotawa, G., Parrish, D. D., Holloway, J. S., Buhr, M. P.,
Hubler, G., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Meagher, J. F.: Ozone production from
Canadian wildfires during June and July of 1995, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
107, 4192, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd000697" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd000697</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S.
A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated
correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
16663–16682, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Moch, J. M., Dovrou, E., Mickley, L. J., Keutsch, F. N., Cheng, Y., Jacob, D.
J., Jiang, J. K., Li, M., Munger, J. W., Qiao, X. H., and Zhang, Q.:
Contribution of Hydroxymethane Sulfonate to Ambient Particulate Matter: A
Potential Explanation for High Particulate Sulfur During Severe Winter Haze
in Beijing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 11969–11979, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl079309" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl079309</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Pagowski, M., Grell, G. A., McKeen, S. A., Peckham, S. E., and Devenyi, D.:
Three dimensional variational data assimilation of ozone and fine particulate
matter observations: some results using the Weather Research and
Forecasting-Chemistry model and Grid-point Statistical Interpolation, Q. J.
Roy. Meteor. Soc., 136, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.700, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Parrish, D. F. and Derber, J. C.: The National-Meteorological-Centers Spectral
Statistical-Interpolation Analysis System, Mon. Weather Rev., 120, 1747–1763,
doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:Tnmcss&gt;2.0.Co;2, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Schwartz, C. S.,  Liu,  Z.,  Lin, H. C.,  and  McKeen, S. A.: Simultaneous
three-dimensional variational assimilation of surface fine particulate matter
and MODIS aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017383, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Shao, J., Chen, Q., Wang, Y., Lu, X., He, P., Sun, Y., Shah, V., Martin, R.
V., Philip, S., Song, S., Zhao, Y., Xie, Z., Zhang, L., and Alexander, B.:
Heterogeneous sulfate aerosol formation mechanisms during wintertime Chinese
haze events: Air quality model assessment using observations of sulfate
oxygen isotopes in Beijing, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2018-1352" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2018-1352</a>, in review, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Sun, Y. L., Wang, Z. F., Du, W., Zhang, Q., Wang, Q. Q., Fu, P. Q., Pan, X.
L., Li, J., Jayne, J., and Worsnop, D. R.: Long-term real-time measurements
of aerosol particle composition in Beijing, China: seasonal variations,
meteorological effects, and source analysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15,
10149–10165, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10149-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10149-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
The Central People's Government of the People Republic of China: Guiding
Opinions on Promoting the Joint Prevention and Control of Air Pollution to
Improve Regional Air Quality, Beijing, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
The Central People's Government of the People Republic of China: Atmospheric
Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Levy Zamora, M., Hu, M., Lin,
Y., Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang,
Y., Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P.,
Marrero-Ortiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L., Shao,
M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B., Cai, L.,
Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R. A., Kolb,
C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog to
Chinese haze, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 13630–13635,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, G., Zhang, F., Peng, J., Duan, L., Ji, Y., Marrero-Ortiz, W., Wang, J.,
Li, J., Wu, C., Cao, C., Wang, Y., Zheng, J., Secrest, J., Li, Y., Wang, Y.,
Li, H., Li, N., and Zhang, R.: Particle acidity and sulfate production during
severe haze events in China cannot be reliably inferred by assuming a mixture
of inorganic salts, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 10123–10132,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-10123-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-10123-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, L. T., Wei, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, F. F., Su, J., Meng, C. C.,
and Zhang, Q.: The 2013 severe haze over southern Hebei, China: model
evaluation, source apportionment, and policy implications, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 14, 3151–3173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, W., Maenhaut, W., Yang, W., Liu, X. D., Bai, Z. P., Zhang, T., Claeys,
M., Cachier, H., Dong, S. P., and Wang, Y. L.: One-year aerosol
characterization study for PM<sub>2.5</sub> and PM<sub>10</sub> in Beijing,
Atmos. Pollut. Res., 5, 554–562, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5094/Apr.2014.064" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5094/Apr.2014.064</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Y. S., Yao, L., Wang, L. L., Liu, Z. R., Ji, D. S., Tang, G. Q., Zhang,
J. K., Sun, Y., Hu, B., and Xin, J. Y.: Mechanism for the formation of the
January 2013 heavy haze pollution episode over central and eastern China,
Sci. China Earth Sci., 57, 14–25, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4773-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4773-4</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Wild, O., Zhu, X., and Prather, M. J.: Fast-j: Accurate simulation of in- and
below-cloud photolysis in tropospheric chemical models, J. Atmos. Chem., 37,
245–282, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, W. S., Purser, R. J., and Parrish, D. F.: Three-dimensional variational
analysis with spatially inhomogeneous covariances, Mon. Weather Rev., 130,
2905–2916, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:Tdvaws&gt;2.0.Co;2, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, J., Chang, L., Yan, F., and He, J.: Role of climate anomalies on decadal
variation in the occurrence of wintertime haze in the Yangtze River Delta,
China, Sci. Total Environ., 599–600, 918–925,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.015</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y. R., Liu, X. G., Qu, Y., An, J. L., Jiang, R., Zhang, Y. H., Sun, Y.
L., Wu, Z. J., Zhang, F., Xu, W. Q., and Ma, Q. X.: Characteristics and
formation mechanism of continuous hazes in China: a case study during the
autumn of 2014 in the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 8165–8178,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-8165-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-8165-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Zaveri, R. A. and Peters, L. K.: A new lumped structure photochemical
mechanism for large-scale applications, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104,
30387–30415, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Zaveri, R. A., Easter, R. C., Fast, J. D., and Peters, L. K.: Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC), J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 113, D13204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008782" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008782</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Shao, J., Lu, X., Zhao, Y., Hu, Y., Henze, D. K., Liao, H., Gong,
S., and Zhang, Q.: Sources and Processes Affecting Fine Particulate Matter
Pollution over North China: An Adjoint Analysis of the Beijing APEC Period,
Environ. Sci. Technol., 50, 8731–8740, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., He, K. B., Huo, H., Kannari,
A., Klimont, Z., Park, I. S., Reddy, S., Fu, J. S., Chen, D., Duan, L., Lei,
Y., Wang, L. T., and Yao, Z. L.: Asian emissions in 2006 for the NASA INTEX-B
mission, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5131–5153,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, S., Feng, T., Tie, X., Long, X., Li, G., Cao, J., Zhou, W., and An, Z.:
Impact of Climate Change on Siberian High and Wintertime Air Pollution in
China in Past Two Decades, Earth's Future, 6, 118–133,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000682" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000682</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Zhou, Y. D., Qiu, L. P., and Zhang, J.: Quantifying the
uncertainties of China's emission inventory for industrial sources: From
national to provincial and city scales, Atmos. Environ., 165, 207–221,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.045" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.045</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Zhang, Y., He, K. B., Wang, K., Zheng, G. J., Duan, F.
K., Ma, Y. L., and Kimoto, T.: Heterogeneous chemistry: a mechanism missing
in current models to explain secondary inorganic aerosol formation during the
January 2013 haze episode in North China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2031–2049,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2031-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2031-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., Li, H., Li, X.,
Peng, L., Qi, J., Yan, L., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zheng, Y., He, K., and Zhang,
Q.: Trends in China's anthropogenic emissions since 2010 as the consequence
of clean air actions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14095–14111,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018</a>, 2018.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Zhi, G. R., Zhang, Y. Y., Sun, J. Z., Cheng, M. M., Dang, H. Y., Liu, S. J.,
Yang, J. C., Zhang, Y. Z., Xue, Z. G., Li, S. Y., and Meng, F.: Village
energy survey reveals missing rural raw coal in northern China: Significance
in science and policy, Environ. Pollut., 223, 705–712,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.02.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.02.009</a>, 2017.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Zuo, Z. Y., Zhang, R. H., Huang, Y., Xiao, D., and Guo, D.: Extreme cold and
warm events over China in wintertime, Int. J. Climatol., 35, 3568–3581,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4229" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4229</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
