<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.4" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">jamp</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2327-4379</issn>
      <issn pub-type="ppub">2327-4352</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jamp.2026.143056</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">jamp-150235</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Article</subject>
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Physics</subject>
          <subject>Mathematics</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Joint Dependence Structure and Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity between NO2 and PM2.5 in Beijing: A Mixture Copula-Based Analysis</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            <given-names>Xiating</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label> School of Mathematics and Statistics, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, China </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <fn fn-type="conflict" id="fn-conflict">
          <p>The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p>
        </fn>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub">
        <day>09</day>
        <month>03</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection">
        <month>03</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>14</volume>
      <issue>03</issue>
      <fpage>1184</fpage>
      <lpage>1205</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>26</day>
          <month>02</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>15</day>
          <month>03</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="published">
          <day>18</day>
          <month>03</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>© 2026 by the authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
        <license license-type="open-access">
          <license-p> This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( <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 content-type="doi" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2026.143056">https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2026.143056</self-uri>
      <abstract>
        <p>Under the context of urban compound air pollution, the joint dependence structure and spatiotemporal characteristics between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> have not yet been systematically quantified. To reveal their co-variation mechanisms, this study utilizes daily average data from 31 air quality monitoring stations covering urban and suburban areas of Beijing during 2023-2024. A staged analytical framework integrating overall modeling, spatial clustering, and seasonal stratification is constructed. First, a mixture copula model is employed to characterize the overall joint distribution of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Subsequently, statistical fingerprint clustering combined with seasonal analysis is applied to identify spatial and temporal heterogeneity in the dependence structure. The results indicate a moderately strong positive dependence between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> across Beijing, with an asymmetric structure featuring upper-tail-dominant dependence structure. This suggests that the two pollutants are more likely to increase synchronously under high-pollution conditions, implying a joint amplification effect during extreme pollution episodes. Spatial clustering analysis reveals significant gradient differences in concentration levels among monitoring stations, particularly for NO<sub>2</sub>, which exhibits significant spatial stratification. However, the form of the dependence structure remains relatively stable, indicating that spatial location primarily influences pollution intensity rather than coupling mechanisms. Seasonal variation substantially restructures the joint distribution. During the heating season, the two pollutants exhibit strong positive dependence and lower tail dependence, whereas in the non-heating season, the dependence is characterized by upper-tail-dominant feature. These findings suggest that seasonal factors exert a stronger regulatory effect on the pollutant dependence structure than spatial differences. This study reveals the spatiotemporal characteristics of the synergistic evolution of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing, providing support for joint risk assessment of extreme pollution events and seasonally differentiated coordinated control strategies.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-generated" xml:lang="en">
        <kwd>Dependence Modeling</kwd>
        <kwd>Mixture Copula</kwd>
        <kwd>Air Pollution</kwd>
        <kwd>Clustering</kwd>
        <kwd>Spatiotemporal Characteristics</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>With the accelerating pace of global urbanization, urban air pollution has become one of the core environmental challenges constraining sustainable development and public health security [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2</xref>]. Among various atmospheric pollutants, fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) and nitrogen dioxide (NO<sub>2</sub>) are considered representative urban pollutants due to their widespread emission sources, relatively high ambient concentrations, and substantial health risks. Many epidemiological studies have demonstrated that exposure to NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> is strongly associated with respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and premature mortality [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">3</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>]. In severe pollution episodes, these two pollutants often exhibit synchronous increases, with joint exposure effects potentially exceeding those of individual pollutants. Therefore, revealing the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> is of great significance for understanding the formation mechanisms of compound air pollution and conducting joint risk assessments.</p>
      <p>In recent years, copula models have been widely applied in multivariate dependence modeling of air pollution variables. As a flexible multivariate dependence modeling tool, copula can precisely describe the joint structure between variables without assuming marginal distribution forms, making it particularly suitable for air pollutant data with significant asymmetry and tail dependence [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">9</xref>]. In practical applications, <italic>Archimedean copulas</italic> are frequently employed to describe different types of tail dependence structures [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>]. Previous studies have applied copula models to joint analyses of different regions and pollution combinations. For example, Masseran <italic>et al.</italic> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>] combined copula models with other statistical models to analyze the dependence structure among multiple air pollutants in Malaysia. Zhang <italic>et al.</italic> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">11</xref>] employed five copula models to study the multiscale correlations between PM<sub>2.5</sub> and O<sub>3</sub> in three major Chinese cities. Abbasi <italic>et al.</italic> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>] integrated time-series clustering with classical Archimedean copula models to explore the temporal variation and dependence between PM<sub>2.5</sub> and associated pollutants in Tehran. Sak <italic>et al.</italic> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">14</xref>] assessed PM<sub>2.5</sub> pollution risk in multiple Chinese cities based on copula models. Chan <italic>et al.</italic> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>] constructed multivariate copula models to investigate dependence relationships of extreme air pollution events.</p>
      <p>However, a single copula model is typically capable of capturing only one specific type of tail dependence. In real atmospheric environments, pollutant dependence structures are influenced jointly by emission sources, meteorological conditions, and regional transport processes, often resulting in composite structural characteristics. To overcome this limitation, recent studies have introduced linear combinations of copula models (mixture copula models), which more comprehensively fit complex dependence structures by weighting different copulas [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>]. The joint distribution of air pollutants frequently exhibits non-normality, asymmetry, and tail dependence characteristics [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">4</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>], which traditional linear correlation analysis cannot fully reveal. Therefore, this study adopts a mixture copula model composed of Gumbel, Clayton and Frank copulas to flexibly capture the potential multiple dependence patterns between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>.</p>
      <p>Compared to existing studies, this paper extends the methodological framework hierarchically. An overall dependence baseline model is first established, followed by the integration of spatial clustering, seasonal stratification, and copula modeling to progressively reveal the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the joint distribution between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Through this stepwise analytical framework, the paper aims to uncover the structural evolution patterns of their joint distribution in Beijing, thereby providing quantitative support for refined air quality management and differentiated prevention strategies. The proposed framework also offers methodological reference for multi-station, multi-pollutant joint risk assessment in other metropolitan regions.</p>
      <p>The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 introduces the study area and data. Section 3 describes the research methods and model fundamentals. Section 4 presents the model fitting results and provides comprehensive analysis and discussion. Section 5 summarizes the main conclusions.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec2">
      <title>2. Study Area and Data</title>
      <sec id="sec2dot1">
        <title>2.1. Study Area and Data Sources</title>
        <p>Beijing is located in the northern part of China and is characterized by a temperate continental monsoon climate. Influenced by terrain and urban heat island effects, atmospheric diffusion and pollutant accumulation processes in this region exhibit substantial complexity, making it a typical case for investigating compound urban air pollution mechanisms. As the political, economic, and cultural center of China, Beijing has a dense population, frequent economic activities, and high energy consumption intensity. Consequently, modeling air pollutant behavior in Beijing is of great significance.</p>
        <p>The data for this study are sourced from the Beijing Municipal Environmental Monitoring Center. Initially 35 air quality monitoring stations within Beijing were selected (station distribution shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). These stations cover urban and suburban functional zones, comprehensively reflecting the spatial distribution characteristics of air quality across the city. The research data consist of daily average concentrations of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> at each station from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2024 (units: μg/m<sup>3</sup>).</p>
        <fig id="fig1">
          <label>Figure 1</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId13.jpeg?20260318013957" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 1</bold><bold>.</bold> Distribution of air quality monitoring stations in Beijing.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot2">
        <title>2.2. Data Preprocessing</title>
        <p>In practical air quality monitoring, data missing is inevitable due to equipment maintenance, power interruptions, or instrument failures. Existing studies have indicated that missing air quality data typically follows a random missing pattern [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">22</xref>]. If not handled properly, missing data may cause bias in statistical modeling and parameter estimation. To ensure data integrity and reliability of analysis results, a hierarchical preprocessing strategy is adopted. If a monitoring station has consecutive missing data exceeding 10 days, it is considered to have insufficient data integrity and is entirely excluded. For a small number of discrete missing values, a sliding window interpolation method is used [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">23</xref>]. </p>
        <p>After data screening and preprocessing, four stations—Huairou New Town, Shunyi New Town, Mentougou Sanjiadian, and Changping Nanshao—are excluded due to continuous missing records exceeding 10 days, leaving 31 monitoring stations for subsequent analysis. Statistical results indicate that the overall missing rates for NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> data across valid stations are 0.26% and 0.29%, respectively, with missing patterns primarily consisting of short-term discrete gaps (1 - 4 consecutive days).</p>
        <p>To address this pattern, a sliding window linear interpolation approach is employed to impute missing values. For periods of consecutive missing days <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> m </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn><mml:mo> ≤ </mml:mo><mml:mi> m </mml:mi><mml:mo> ≤ </mml:mo><mml:mn> 4 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ), a window centered on the missing interval is constructed by taking <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ⌈ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi> m </mml:mi><mml:mo> / </mml:mo><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ⌉ </mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo> + </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> valid observations both before and after the missing segment. Linear interpolation is performed based on the valid data within the window. Prior to interpolation, extreme concentration values of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> are identified using the Z-score method (<inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> | </mml:mo><mml:mi> Z </mml:mi><mml:mo> | </mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo> &gt; </mml:mo><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ) and preserve without participating in the interpolation calculations. In addition, interpolated values are constrained within the 5th–95th percentile range of the corresponding pollutant at each station to avoid distortion of extreme concentration distribution. This preprocessing procedure maintains sample size while improving data quality and the stability of model estimation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">23</xref>].</p>
        <p>To characterize the overall pollution level in Beijing, daily average concentrations from multiple stations are aggregated to construct a regional-scale dataset. Specifically, the arithmetic mean of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations across all valid stations is calculated for each observation day, serving as a regional representative concentration.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec3">
      <title>3. Methodology</title>
      <sec id="sec3dot1">
        <title>3.1. Copula Model</title>
        <p>To characterize the nonlinear and asymmetric dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, a joint distribution modeling framework based on copula theory is adopted. Copula models serve as a powerful tool that links multivariate joint distributions with their marginal distributions, enabling the separation of dependence structure from marginal behavior and allowing independent modeling of each component. According to Sklar’s theorem [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">24</xref>], for two random variables <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> X </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> Y </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> with joint distribution function <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> H </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi> x </mml:mi><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mi> y </mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and marginal distribution functions <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> F </mml:mi><mml:mi> X </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mi> x </mml:mi><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> F </mml:mi><mml:mi> Y </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mi> y </mml:mi><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , respectively, there exists a copula function <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mo> : </mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> [ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 0 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ] </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo> → </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> [ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 0 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ] </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> such that </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD1">
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mi>H</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>y</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>X</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mi>y</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>Different copulas can capture distinct tail dependence structures [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>]. This study selects three classic Archimedean copulas—Gumbel, Clayton and Frank—primarily based on their theoretical suitability and relevance to atmospheric physics. Gumbel copula captures upper tail dependence, reflecting the joint increase of pollutant concentrations during severe pollution episodes. Clayton copula characterizes lower tail dependence and is capable of modeling the synchronous decrease of pollutant concentrations under clean-air conditions. Frank copula describes symmetric dependence, reflecting moderate correlations under normal pollution levels. Together, these three copulas provide complementary representations of dependence across the full concentration range and have been widely used in air pollution dependence modeling. Although other copula families could also be considered, their tail dependence characteristics largely overlap with those of the above models and would substantially increase model complexity. Since the Gumbel-Clayton-Frank combination flexibly fits the dependence features of the pollutants in this study while maintaining model simplicity and interpretability, additional copulas are not included. Therefore, this study adopts the following mixture copula [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>]: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD2">
          <label>(1)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>mix</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>G</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mi> G </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mi> C </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mi> F </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denote Gumbel, Clayton and Frank copulas, respectively; <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the intrinsic parameters of Gumbel, Clayton and Frank copulas, satisfying <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> ∈ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> [ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mi> ∞ </mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> ∈ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 0 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mi> ∞ </mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> ≠ </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ; <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the weight parameters corresponding to the copulas in the mixture model, satisfying <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> ∈ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> [ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn> 0 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ] </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> i </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:msubsup><mml:mo> ∑ </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi> i </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> . The three copulas are given by: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD3">
          <label>(2)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>G</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mi>exp</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msup>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:msup>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:mrow>
                                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                                <mml:mrow>
                                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                                  <mml:mi>log</mml:mi>
                                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                                </mml:mrow>
                                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                              </mml:mrow>
                            </mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                              </mml:msub>
                            </mml:mrow>
                          </mml:msup>
                          <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                          <mml:msup>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:mrow>
                                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                                <mml:mrow>
                                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                                  <mml:mi>log</mml:mi>
                                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                                </mml:mrow>
                                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                              </mml:mrow>
                            </mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                              </mml:msub>
                            </mml:mrow>
                          </mml:msup>
                        </mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                        <mml:mo>/</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:msub>
                            <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                            <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                          </mml:msub>
                        </mml:mrow>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:mrow>
                  </mml:msup>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <disp-formula id="FD4">
          <label>(3)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:msup>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msup>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:msub>
                            <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                            <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                          </mml:msub>
                        </mml:mrow>
                      </mml:msup>
                      <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msup>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:msub>
                            <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                            <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                          </mml:msub>
                        </mml:mrow>
                      </mml:msup>
                      <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    <mml:mo>/</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msup>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <disp-formula id="FD5">
          <label>(4)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mfrac>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:msup>
                            <mml:mtext>e</mml:mtext>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                              </mml:msub>
                              <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                            </mml:mrow>
                          </mml:msup>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                        </mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                      </mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:msup>
                            <mml:mtext>e</mml:mtext>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                              </mml:msub>
                              <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                            </mml:mrow>
                          </mml:msup>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                        </mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msup>
                        <mml:mtext>e</mml:mtext>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:msub>
                            <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                            <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                          </mml:msub>
                        </mml:mrow>
                      </mml:msup>
                      <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    </mml:mrow>
                  </mml:mfrac>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>By adjusting the mixture weights, the mixture model can theoretically provide a more accurate approximation of the true dependence structure.</p>
        <p>To quantify the dependence structure and tail synergy characteristics between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, Kendall’s rank correlation coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> τ </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> , as well as upper tail dependence parameter <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> U </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and lower tail dependence parameter <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are employed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>]: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD6">
          <label>(5)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mi>τ</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>4</mml:mn>
              <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true">
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mo>∬</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msup>
                        <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                      </mml:msup>
                    </mml:mrow>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                      </mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mtext>d</mml:mtext>
                    <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                      </mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                    </mml:mrow>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mstyle>
              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <disp-formula id="FD7">
          <label>(6)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>U</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
              <mml:munder>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>lim</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>→</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:munder>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <disp-formula id="FD8">
          <label>(7)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>L</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:munder>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>lim</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>→</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>0</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:munder>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>Kendall’s <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> τ </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> reflects the degree of concordance in monotonic correlation between two variables [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>]. A positive value indicates positive dependence, whereas a negative value indicates negative dependence. The tail dependence parameters quantify the probability of two variables significantly increasing or decreasing simultaneously within the same period. <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> U </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measures the probability of joint extreme high values, while <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measures the probability of joint extreme low values. Tail dependence parameters can reveal the synchronous fluctuation mechanisms of pollutants under heavy pollution or clean backgrounds, serving as important statistical indicators for characterizing extreme event risk coupling [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>].</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot2">
        <title>3.2. Marginal Distribution Estimation</title>
        <p>Considering that pollutant concentration sequences typically exhibit heavy tails and non-normal characteristics, assuming parametric marginal distributions may introduce model misspecification bias. To enhance model robustness, this paper employs empirical distribution functions to estimate marginal distributions. For a sample size <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> n </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> observation sequence <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> X </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> Y </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mo> ⋯ </mml:mo><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> X </mml:mi><mml:mi> n </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> Y </mml:mi><mml:mi> n </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , the empirical distribution functions are defined as: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD9">
          <label>(8)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mover accent="true">
                  <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>^</mml:mo>
                </mml:mover>
                <mml:mi>X</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:munderover>
                <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" mathsize="140%">
                  <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                </mml:mstyle>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:munderover>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>X</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mover accent="true">
                  <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>^</mml:mo>
                </mml:mover>
                <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mi>y</mml:mi>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:munderover>
                <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" mathsize="140%">
                  <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                </mml:mstyle>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:munderover>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>y</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> I </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mo> ⋅ </mml:mo><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the indicator function. Subsequently, rank transformation is used to convert the original observation sequence into pseudo-observations <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> U </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> V </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> : </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD10">
          <label>(9)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>U</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Rank</mml:mtext>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>X</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>V</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Rank</mml:mtext>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot3">
        <title>3.3. Parameter Estimation</title>
        <p>Maximum pseudo-likelihood estimation is widely used to estimate copula parameters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>]. This study employs maximum pseudo-likelihood estimation to solve the parameters of the mixture copula. The pseudo-log-likelihood function is defined as: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD11">
          <label>(10)</label>
          <mml:math display="inline">
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mi>log</mml:mi>
              <mml:mi>L</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mi>ϕ</mml:mi>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:munderover>
                <mml:mstyle mathsize="140%" displaystyle="true">
                  <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                </mml:mstyle>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:munderover>
              <mml:mi>log</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>c</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>G</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>c</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>c</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>;</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> ϕ </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> θ </mml:mi><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the parameter vector of the mixture copula, and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> c </mml:mi><mml:mi> G </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> c </mml:mi><mml:mi> C </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> c </mml:mi><mml:mi> F </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the probability density functions of Gumbel, Clayton and Frank copulas, respectively. Under parameter constraints, the interior point method is used to numerically maximize the objective function.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot4">
        <title>3.4. Model Evaluation and Goodness-of-Fit Testing</title>
        <p>To systematically evaluate model performance, this paper constructs a multidimensional evaluation system, including the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), root mean square error (RMSE), and Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistic [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>].</p>
        <p>AIC balances fitting goodness and model complexity, defined as: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD12">
          <label>(11)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mtext>AIC</mml:mtext>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
              <mml:mi>k</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
              <mml:mi>log</mml:mi>
              <mml:mi>L</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> k </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of model parameters, and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> log </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the log-likelihood value.</p>
        <p>Based on the pseudo-observations <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo> ( </mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> U </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> , </mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi> V </mml:mi><mml:mi> i </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo> ) </mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , the empirical copula is constructed as: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD13">
          <label>(12)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mover accent="true">
                  <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>^</mml:mo>
                </mml:mover>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:munderover>
                <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" mathsize="140%">
                  <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                </mml:mstyle>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
              </mml:munderover>
              <mml:mtext>
                 
              </mml:mtext>
              <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>U</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mi>V</mml:mi>
                    <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>RMSE calculates the differences between the empirical copula and theoretical copula at all observation points: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD14">
          <label>(13)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mtext>RMSE</mml:mtext>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:msqrt>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mfrac>
                    <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                  </mml:mfrac>
                  <mml:munderover>
                    <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" mathsize="140%">
                      <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                    </mml:mstyle>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                  </mml:munderover>
                  <mml:msup>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:msub>
                            <mml:mover accent="true">
                              <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                              <mml:mo>^</mml:mo>
                            </mml:mover>
                            <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                          </mml:msub>
                          <mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                              </mml:msub>
                              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                              </mml:msub>
                            </mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                          </mml:mrow>
                          <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                            <mml:mrow>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                              </mml:msub>
                              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                              <mml:msub>
                                <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                              </mml:msub>
                            </mml:mrow>
                            <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                          </mml:mrow>
                        </mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                  </mml:msup>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msqrt>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>The KS statistic tests the maximum deviation between empirical and model distributions: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD15">
          <label>(14)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mtext>KS</mml:mtext>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:munder>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>max</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
              </mml:munder>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>|</mml:mo>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msub>
                    <mml:mover accent="true">
                      <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                      <mml:mo>^</mml:mo>
                    </mml:mover>
                    <mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msub>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>u</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mo>|</mml:mo>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mo>.</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>To test the significance of the statistics, a parametric bootstrap procedure is implemented [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">32</xref>]. Simulated samples are generated based on estimated parameters, and RMSE and KS statistics are recalculated for each group of simulated samples, yielding <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> B </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> simulated statistics. The <italic>p</italic>-value of the observed statistic in the simulated distribution is calculated using the +1 correction method to improve sample robustness: </p>
        <disp-formula id="FD16">
          <label>(15)</label>
          <mml:math>
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mi>p</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mfrac>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:msubsup>
                    <mml:mstyle mathsize="140%" displaystyle="true">
                      <mml:mo>∑</mml:mo>
                    </mml:mstyle>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:mi>b</mml:mi>
                      <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
                      <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mi>B</mml:mi>
                  </mml:msubsup>
                  <mml:mtext>
                     
                  </mml:mtext>
                  <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>(</mml:mo>
                    <mml:mrow>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>T</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mi>b</mml:mi>
                      </mml:msub>
                      <mml:mo>≥</mml:mo>
                      <mml:msub>
                        <mml:mi>T</mml:mi>
                        <mml:mrow>
                          <mml:mtext>obs</mml:mtext>
                        </mml:mrow>
                      </mml:msub>
                    </mml:mrow>
                    <mml:mo>)</mml:mo>
                  </mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mi>B</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> T </mml:mi><mml:mi> b </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the statistic from the <italic>b</italic>-th simulation, and <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> T </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext> obs </mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the observed statistic. A model is considered statistically adequate if the <italic>p</italic>-value exceeds the chosen significance level.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot5">
        <title>3.5. Clustering Analysis</title>
        <p>Clustering analysis is a classical unsupervised learning method aimed at automatically grouping samples based on their similarity structure without prior knowledge [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>]. As an important analytical tool in environmental science, clustering methods are widely applied to identify potential patterns and heterogeneity in complex observational datasets [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>]. To distinguish differences among monitoring stations in terms of pollutant concentration characteristics and dependence structures, this paper adopts a clustering method based on statistical feature fingerprints. This method transforms raw observation sequences into low-dimensional feature vectors and achieves station grouping through traditional clustering algorithms. According to the type of pollution characteristics, clustering methods can generally be classified into shape-based, feature-based and model-based categories [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">35</xref>]. Given the obvious non-stationarity and extreme value sensitivity of pollutant data, this paper adopts a feature-based method, condensing high-dimensional observational data into interpretable statistical indicators for clustering analysis.</p>
        <p>3.5.1. Statistical Feature Extraction</p>
        <p>To enhance the robustness and interpretability of the analysis, the raw daily concentration series are not directly used. Instead, a statistical feature vector is constructed for each monitoring station, treating NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> as a coupled system for joint characterization. The feature vector consists of two categories:</p>
        <p>1) <bold>Basic statistical features (12 dimensions).</bold> Mean, median, standard deviation, interquartile range (IQR), skewness and kurtosis are calculated separately for NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>. These indicators comprehensively describe the average concentration levels, fluctuation degrees and distributional shape of pollutants. The IQR serves as a robust measure of variability that effectively resists extreme pollution values, while skewness and kurtosis reflect the asymmetry and tail thickness characteristics of the data distribution.</p>
        <p>2) <bold>Interaction relationship features (6 dimensions).</bold> Pearson’s correlation coefficient between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, linear regression slope, median concentration ratio, and high-concentration co-occurrence proportion (proportion where both exceed their respective 75th quantiles). These features quantify the linear dependence strength, relative growth relationships and extreme event synergy probabilities between pollutants, thereby facilitating the distinction of stations dominated by traffic sources from those dominated by regional transport. </p>
        <p>3.5.2. Feature Standardization and Dimensionality Reduction</p>
        <p>To eliminate differences in scale and mitigate potential collinearity among features, grouped Z-score standardization is applied to the original feature matrix. Subsequently, principal component analysis (PCA) is used to reduce the dimension of the standardized matrix, retaining principal components that collectively explain at least 90% of the cumulative variance [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">36</xref>]. The resulting low-dimensional score matrix obtained from PCA serves as the input for the clustering algorithm, reducing computational complexity while preserving the core structural information embedded in the original features.</p>
        <p>3.5.3. Clustering Algorithm and Determination of the Optimal Number of Clusters</p>
        <p>In the PCA-reduced space, the K-means algorithm is employed to cluster the monitoring stations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">37</xref>]. To avoid local optima, 100 random initializations are set for repeated runs and the squared Euclidean distance is used as the similarity metric. Considering the potential spatial differentiation patterns within the study region, the number of clusters is pre-specified within the range <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> K </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 5. The optimal number of clusters is determined based on the silhouette coefficient, which comprehensively evaluates within-cluster compactness and between-cluster separation. The <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> K </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value with the highest silhouette coefficient is selected as the optimal number of clusters.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec4">
      <title>4. Results and Discussion</title>
      <sec id="sec4dot1">
        <title>4.1. Overall Joint Distribution Characteristics</title>
        <p>To establish a foundational understanding of the joint distribution between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations in Beijing, an overall analysis was conducted using daily average observations from 31 monitoring stations during 2023-2024. The overall sample results are shown in <bold>Table 1</bold>. During the study period, the average concentration of NO<sub>2</sub> is 25.704 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, whereas that of PM<sub>2.5</sub> is 33.456 μg/m<sup>3</sup>. The standard deviation of PM<sub>2.5</sub> (28.167 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) is substantially higher than that of NO<sub>2</sub> (13.695 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), indicating that PM<sub>2.5</sub> exhibits stronger volatility and instability. In terms of extreme values, the maximum value of PM<sub>2.5</sub> is 166.461 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, reflecting the occurrence of severe pollution episodes during the observation period. From a distributional perspective, the skewness of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> is 0.957 and 1.816, respectively, and the corresponding kurtosis is 3.501 and 6.844. Both pollutants exhibit obvious right-skewed and heavy-tailed characteristics, with PM<sub>2.5</sub> displaying a markedly heavier tail. This suggests that extreme high-pollution events have a significant impact on the overall statistical structure.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 1</bold><bold>.</bold> Descriptive statistics of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> (μg/m<sup>3</sup>).</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl1">
          <label>Table 1</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Variable</td>
                <td>Mean</td>
                <td>Min</td>
                <td>Max</td>
                <td>Std. Dev.</td>
                <td>Skewness</td>
                <td>Kurtosis</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  NO
                  <sub>2</sub>
                </td>
                <td>25.704</td>
                <td>4.853</td>
                <td>72.250</td>
                <td>13.695</td>
                <td>0.957</td>
                <td>3.501</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  PM
                  <sub>2.5</sub>
                </td>
                <td>33.456</td>
                <td>1.658</td>
                <td>166.461</td>
                <td>28.167</td>
                <td>1.816</td>
                <td>6.844</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> shows the scatter plot between the two variables, showing an overall positive correlation between them. Data points are densely clustered in the low-concentration range, exhibiting an approximately linear trend. Observations in the high-concentration range become sparse and more dispersed, without an evident clustering pattern.</p>
        <fig id="fig2">
          <label>Figure 2</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId124.jpeg?20260318014003" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 2</bold><bold>.</bold> Scatter plot of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>.</p>
        <p>To further quantify the nonlinear and asymmetric joint distribution characteristics between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentration sequences, based on the above joint samples, we transformed the marginal distributions using the empirical distribution function obtained from Equation (8), and then fitted Gumbel, Clayton, Frank copulas and their mixture copula model, respectively.</p>
        <p>Model selection was conducted using the AIC, RMSE and the KS test. The model evaluation results are shown in <bold>Table 2</bold>. The mixture copula model has an AIC value of −382.844 and RMSE of 0.007, both optimal among the four. Moreover, it passes the KS test, with a KS statistic of 0.020 and a <italic>p</italic>-value of 0.276, indicating no statistically significant difference between the fitted and empirical distributions at the 0.05 significance level. Statistically, the mixture copula demonstrates the best overall goodness-of-fit.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 2</bold><bold>.</bold> Comparison of copula model fitting goodness for overall data.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl2">
          <label>Table 2</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Copula</td>
                <td>AIC</td>
                <td>RMSE</td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mi>τ</mml:mi>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>U</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>L</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mixture</td>
                <td>−382.844</td>
                <td>0.007</td>
                <td>0.451</td>
                <td>0.265</td>
                <td>0.085</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Gumbel</td>
                <td>−370.890</td>
                <td>0.009</td>
                <td>0.422</td>
                <td>0.507</td>
                <td>0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Clayton</td>
                <td>−295.595</td>
                <td>0.023</td>
                <td>0.346</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>0.520</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Frank</td>
                <td>−373.525</td>
                <td>0.011</td>
                <td>0.451</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>0</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>To visually verify the ability of each model to characterize the data dependence structure, the empirical joint probability density function is compared with the theoretical densities implied by the four copula models (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). From the figures, it is clear that a single copula model has obvious limitations in capturing dependence structures. Gumbel copula tends to overemphasize upper tail dependence, Clayton copula is more sensitive to lower tail dependence, and Frank copula captures only symmetric dependence. In contrast, the theoretical density of the mixture copula has the highest correlation with the empirical density, not only accurately depicting the dependency patterns within the main data range, but also effectively capturing the asymmetric features at the tails.</p>
        <fig id="fig3">
          <label>Figure 3</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId131.jpeg?20260318014003" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 3</bold><bold>.</bold> Empirical joint probability density.</p>
        <fig id="fig4">
          <label>Figure 4</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId132.jpeg?20260318014003" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 4</bold><bold>.</bold> Theoretical joint probability density: (a) Mixture; (b) Gumbel; (c) Clayton; (d) Frank.</p>
        <fig id="fig5">
          <label>Figure 5</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId133.jpeg?20260318014003" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 5</bold><bold>.</bold> Q-Q plot of the mixture copula.</p>
        <p>After determining the mixture copula as the optimal model, its quantile fitting performance was further examined using a Q-Q plot comparing theoretical and empirical quantiles (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>). From <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>, it can be seen that sample points are basically distributed around the diagonal, with no obvious deviation even in extreme quantile intervals close to 0 and 1. It indicates that the mixture copula model not only fits well overall but also accurately characterizes the dependence structure of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> under extreme concentrations.</p>
        <p>Substituting the NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> data into Equations (1)-(4) and Equation (10) yielded the parameters for the four copula models, with parameter estimation results shown in <bold>Table 3</bold>. For the mixture copula, the weight parameters are <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 1 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.523 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.131 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> α </mml:mi><mml:mn> 3 </mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.346 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> . These results indicate that the model is upper-tail-dominant dependence structure of Gumbel copula, while incorporating lower-tail-dominant dependence structure from Clayton copula and symmetric dependence from Frank copula. This weighted combination produces an asymmetric dependence structure more consistent with reality. The Kendall’s <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> τ </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the mixture copula is 0.451, with an upper tail dependence parameter <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> U </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.265 and a lower tail dependence parameter <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.085. This indicates that a moderate positive association between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, with a substantially higher probability of joint extreme high concentrations than joint extreme low concentrations. The dependence structure can therefore be characterized as being dominated by high-pollution synergy.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 3</bold><bold>.</bold> Parameter estimates of the four copula models.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl3">
          <label>Table 3</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Copula</td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>α</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mn>3</mml:mn>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mixture</td>
                <td>1.730</td>
                <td>1.625</td>
                <td>5.564</td>
                <td>0.523</td>
                <td>0.131</td>
                <td>0.346</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Gumbel</td>
                <td>1.730</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Clayton</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>1.059</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Frank</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>4.914</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
                <td>–</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>In summary, the mixture copula not only comprehensively captures the multiple dependence patterns between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations but also performs best across all fitting goodness indicators, making it suitable for describing complex dependence structures in such environmental pollutant data.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec4dot2">
        <title>4.2. Spatial Clustering Analysis of Stations</title>
        <p>To investigate the influence of spatial heterogeneity on the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, the K-means algorithm was applied to cluster the 31 air quality monitoring stations. The results indicate that the silhouette coefficient reaches its maximum value (0.692) when <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> K </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 2 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , suggesting that partitioning the stations into two groups yields the optimal clustering performance. This configuration effectively distinguishes the core differences in pollutant concentration characteristics and dependency relationships across regions. The final clustering results are to divide the 31 stations into two groups, with spatial distribution as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>, highly consistent with Beijing’s “urban-suburban” geographical pattern. In subsequent analysis, the first group from the clustering results is uniformly referred to as the “urban-biased group,” and the second group as the “suburban-biased group.”</p>
        <fig id="fig6">
          <label>Figure 6</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId160.jpeg?20260318014004" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 6</bold><bold>.</bold> Spatial distribution of clustering.</p>
        <p>The urban-biased group consists of 18 stations, including Dongcheng Dongsi, Dongcheng Tiantan, Fengtai Yungang, Fengtai Xiaotun, Yizhuang Development Zone, Jingdongnan Regional Point, Daxing Jiugong, Daxing Huangcun, Fangshan Liangxiang, Chaoyang Nongzhanguan, Chaoyang Aoti Center, Haidian Wanliu, Shijingshan Gucheng, Shijingshan Laoshan, Xicheng Wanshouxigong, Xicheng Guanyuan, Tongzhou Dongguan, Tongzhou Yongshun. These stations are mainly located within central urban districts and southeastern near-suburban areas. Their locations are close to major urban traffic arteries, commercial areas and densely populated regions, exhibiting typical urban pollution characteristics. The concentration levels of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> are generally high, with average values of 30.63 μg/m<sup>3</sup> and 35.88 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient is 0.618, showing strong correlation. This pattern reflects the synergistic pollution characteristics dominated by local emission sources, particularly traffic-related emissions in densely populated areas with high human activity.</p>
        <p>The suburban-biased group consists of 13 stations, including Dingling Control Point, Miyun New City, Miyun Town, Pinggu New City, Pinggu Town, Yanqing Xiandu, Yanqing Shiheying, Huairou Town, Fangshan Yanshan, Changping Town, Haidian Sijiqing, Mentougou Shuangyu, and Shunyi Beixiaoying. These stations are mainly distributed in the northwestern and northeastern distant suburbs and ecological conservation zones, far from the urban core, with relatively less influence from local emissions. The overall pollution level of this group of stations is relatively low, with the average values of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> being 18.89 μg/m<sup>3</sup> and 30.10 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. Notably, NO<sub>2</sub> levels are substantially lower than those in the urban-biased group, indicating reduced anthropogenic emission intensity. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient is 0.568, slightly lower than that of the urban-biased group, implying that PM<sub>2.5</sub> sources in these areas may be more complex and relatively more influenced by regional transport and secondary generation processes.</p>
        <p>The above clustering results were basically consistent with Beijing’s actual spatial pattern, indicating that the clustering method effectively captured emission structure differences. The key difference between the two groups lies in the obvious greater decline in NO<sub>2</sub> than PM<sub>2.5</sub>, indicating that atmospheric pollutant concentrations in Beijing exhibited obvious spatial heterogeneity. The urban-biased group stations are dominated by local primary emission sources (traffic, industry, domestic, etc.), while suburban-biased group stations more reflect regional transport and natural background characteristics, with a higher proportion of regional transport and secondary generation contributions to PM<sub>2.5</sub> in suburbs. Meanwhile, the correlation differences between the two groups are limited, indicating that spatial location primarily affects pollutant concentration levels, with limited impact on the overall form of the dependence structure.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec4dot3">
        <title>4.3. Seasonal Analysis of Pollutant Concentrations</title>
        <p>This subsection further takes a temporal dimension into consideration, analyzing the impact of seasonal changes on the dependence structure between pollutants to further elucidate the dynamic association characteristics of pollutants.</p>
        <p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref> shows the seasonal variations in monthly average concentrations of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing from 2023-2024. A highly consistent seasonal cycle is observed for both pollutants: concentrations decrease synchronously during spring and summer, reaching their lowest levels in summer. In contrast, concentrations increase markedly in autumn and winter, peaking during winter months. According to the official heating season classification in Beijing, the heating season is from November 15 to March 15 of the following year, and the non-heating season is from March 16 to November 14. The overall concentration levels of both pollutants during the heating season are significantly higher than those during the non-heating season. This phenomenon reflects that anthropogenic emission intensity such as coal burning significantly increased during the heating season, and meteorological factors such as stable winter atmospheric boundary layers and poor pollutant diffusion conditions jointly lead to enhanced pollution accumulation effects. The seasonal differences in pollutant concentrations suggest that the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> might undergo structural reconfiguration under varying emission intensities and meteorological backgrounds. Therefore, to deeply analyze their joint dependence structure, it is necessary to break through the limitations of full-year mixed analysis and stratify the data by heating and non-heating seasons to capture their potential seasonal pattern transition characteristics.</p>
        <fig id="fig7">
          <label>Figure 7</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1724602-rId161.jpeg?20260318014004" />
        </fig>
        <p><bold>Figure 7</bold><bold>.</bold> Seasonal variations in monthly average concentrations of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing from 2023-2024: (a) 2023; (b) 2024.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec4dot4">
        <title>4.4. Dependence Structure Modeling from a Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity Perspective</title>
        <p>Based on the preceding clustering and seasonal analyses, there are obvious regional and seasonal differences between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations. Accordingly, a two-dimensional analytical framework integrating spatial grouping and seasonal stratification was constructed, yielding four distinct scenarios: urban-biased-heating season, suburban-biased-heating season, urban-biased-non-heating season, and suburban-biased-non-heating season. In each scenario, Gumbel, Clayton, Frank and mixture copula models were fitted separately, enabling a systematic comparison of model performance and dependence characteristics under different spatiotemporal conditions.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 4</bold> summarizes the optimal copula model and parameter estimation results for each scenario. At the significance level <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mi> p </mml:mi><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.05 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , all scenario optimal models pass the KS test, indicating no significant difference between the fitted and empirical distributions, confirming the reliability of the models.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 4</bold><bold>.</bold> Optimal fitting models for the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> under different spatiotemporal scenarios.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl4">
          <label>Table 4</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Region</td>
                <td>Period</td>
                <td>Copula</td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mi>τ</mml:mi>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>U</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>L</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Urban-biased group</td>
                <td>Heating season</td>
                <td>
                  Mixture (
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mn>0.097</mml:mn>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>G</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                        <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mn>0.506</mml:mn>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                        <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mn>0.397</mml:mn>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>0.558</td>
                <td>0.063</td>
                <td>0.380</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Urban-biased group</td>
                <td>Non-heating season</td>
                <td>Gumbel</td>
                <td>0.367</td>
                <td>0.449</td>
                <td>0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Suburban-biased group</td>
                <td>Heating season</td>
                <td>
                  Mixture (
                  <inline-formula>
                    <mml:math>
                      <mml:mrow>
                        <mml:mn>0.602</mml:mn>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                        <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
                        <mml:mn>0.398</mml:mn>
                        <mml:msub>
                          <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                          <mml:mi>F</mml:mi>
                        </mml:msub>
                      </mml:mrow>
                    </mml:math>
                  </inline-formula>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>0.557</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>0.450</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Suburban-biased group</td>
                <td>Non-heating season</td>
                <td>Gumbel</td>
                <td>0.384</td>
                <td>0.467</td>
                <td>0</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>During the heating season, the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in each region exhibits high complexity and asymmetry. The optimal models are all mixture copulas, indicating that a single copula model is insufficient to adequately capture the composite joint distribution patterns. Kendall’s <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> τ </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> exceeds 0.5 in both cases, reflecting moderate positive dependence between pollutants. Tail dependence analysis further revealed that lower tail dependence (<inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.3 </mml:mn><mml:mtext>   </mml:mtext><mml:mtext> - </mml:mtext><mml:mtext>   </mml:mtext><mml:mn> 0.5 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ) is stronger than upper tail dependence (<inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> λ </mml:mi><mml:mi> L </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> &lt; </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.1 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ). This characteristic is jointly driven by the emission patterns during the heating season, boundary-layer dynamics, and secondary formation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">38</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">40</xref>]. Specifically, coal-fired heating induces a surge in PM<sub>2.5</sub> emissions, accompanied by simultaneous increases in NO<sub>2</sub> precursors, resulting in highly coupled emission sources [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">38</xref>]. This elevates the overall pollution level and shifts high-concentration events from extreme occurrences to relatively common conditions, thereby weakening the statistical significance of upper tail dependence. Moreover, the heating season is characterized by a shallow boundary layer and frequent stagnant conditions, which hinder pollutant diffusion [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">39</xref>]. Both pollutants can decline simultaneously only under favorable dispersion conditions, such as strong winds or precipitation. Therefore, synchronized fluctuations are more likely to occur in the lower quantile range, strengthening the lower tail dependence. In addition, low-temperature and stable environments facilitate the conversion of NO<sub>2</sub> into nitrate aerosols, establishing a chemical source-sink relationship. In this process, NO<sub>2</sub> serves as the precursor and PM<sub>2.5</sub> as the nitrate reservoir [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">40</xref>], which enhances the overall positive dependence. Consequently, the heating season dependence structure can be characterized by moderate positive dependence with a lower-tail-dominant pattern.</p>
        <p>In contrast, the dependence structure during the non-heating season is relatively simple. For both spatial groups, Gumbel copula provides the optimal fit. This indicates that a single copula model is sufficient for modeling and interpretation, whereas the additional parameters of the mixture copula enhance flexibility, also significantly increase the estimation complexity, thereby resulting in a decrease in fitting efficiency. Kendall’s <inline-formula><mml:math><mml:mi> τ </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> ranges between 0.3 and 0.4, indicating moderate positive dependence. The upper tail dependence parameters exceed 0.4, while lower tail dependence parameters are all 0. During the non-heating season, the atmospheric boundary-layer height increases and convective activity intensifies, facilitating pollutant dispersion. Synergistic accumulation at low concentrations is unlikely to occur, and lower tail dependence is weak [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>]. Conversely, stagnant meteorological conditions under high temperature and humidity markedly enhance atmospheric oxidizability, promoting photochemical smog formation and secondary aerosol production [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">42</xref>]. This drives the simultaneous increase of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>, resulting in a strong upper tail dependence.</p>
        <p>Within the same season, the dependence patterns of urban-biased and suburban-biased groups stations are similar, but subtle differences exist. For instance, during the heating season, the lower tail dependence in the suburban-biased group is slightly stronger than in the urban-biased group. This difference might reflect the relatively weaker influence of direct anthropogenic emissions in suburban environments, making them more sensitive to synchronized pollutant reductions driven by natural deposition or regional transport dilution processes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>]. Overall, seasonal factors exerted a markedly stronger regulatory influence on the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> than spatial differences. Spatial location primarily affects absolute concentration levels, whereas its structural impact on the coupling mechanisms remained limited.</p>
        <p>The hierarchical analysis demonstrates that the dependence structure between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing is not static but exhibits significant spatiotemporal heterogeneity. The overall tail dominance pattern is decomposed into lower tail dominance during the heating season and upper tail dominance during the non-heating season after stratification. This structural transformation arises from multiple mechanisms, including data aggregation effects (overall averaging obscures local patterns), differentiation of emission sources (urban local emissions versus suburban regional transport), and seasonal meteorological regulation (winter accumulation versus summer photochemical generation). These findings indicate the critical role of a spatiotemporal analytical framework in revealing compound pollution dynamics.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec4dot5">
        <title>4.5. Limitations</title>
        <p>This study has several limitations. First, by treating the heating season and non-heating season as holistic analytical units, the model does not fully account for non-stationarity within seasons. This simplification may obscure dynamic variations at finer temporal scales. Second, meteorological factors (such as wind speed and temperature) were not incorporated as covariates, potentially limiting a deeper mechanistic interpretation of the dependence structure. Finally, the estimated dependence structures reflect statistical associations rather than causal relationships. The joint fluctuations of NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> result from multiple interacting factors, including emissions, meteorology, and chemical transformations, and copula parameters cannot be interpreted as evidence of causal mechanisms. </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec5">
      <title>5. Conclusions</title>
      <p>This paper employs an analytical framework integrating overall modeling, spatial clustering and seasonal stratification. Based on daily average NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> data from 31 air quality monitoring stations in Beijing during 2023-2024, it systematically reveals the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of pollutant joint dependence structures. The main conclusions are as follows:</p>
      <p>First, at the overall scale, NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing exhibit a moderate positive dependence characterized predominantly by asymmetric upper-tail-dominant dependence structure. This indicates a joint amplification effect in high-pollution scenarios. Second, at the spatial scale, stations are clustered into urban-biased and suburban-biased groups, with obvious gradient differences in concentration levels (especially NO<sub>2</sub> spatial stratification), but the dependence structure remains relatively stable. Spatial location primarily regulates pollution intensity rather than coupling mechanisms between pollutants. Third, at the temporal scale, both NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> show clear seasonal cycles. Concentration levels of two pollutants increase significantly during the heating season and decline markedly during the non-heating season, emphasizing the critical roles of meteorological conditions and anthropogenic emissions in pollution accumulation. Fourth, the spatiotemporal heterogeneity analysis indicates that seasonal changes significantly restructure the dependence pattern. The heating season is characterized by strong overall positive dependence and lower-tail-dominant dependence, whereas the non-heating season exhibits upper-tail-dominant dependence. Seasonal effect appears stronger than spatial differences, indicating that the dependence relationship between pollutants has spatiotemporal heterogeneity.</p>
      <p>From a policy perspective, local fitting yields substantially greater practical relevance than overall fitting. While the overall model provides a citywide baseline reference, it is difficult to support differentiated strategies. Spatiotemporal stratification directly points to targeted measures: urban-biased stations need to prioritize regulation of traffic and industrial sources to mitigate the risk of joint high-concentration events; suburban-biased stations require strengthening regional joint prevention and reduce the impact of pollution transmission; during the heating season, emission limits should be implemented, and during non-heating seasons, particular attention should be paid to controlling NO<sub>2</sub> as a key ozone precursor to suppress photochemical synergistic amplification. Such a refined strategy is far more effective than uniform, citywide interventions.</p>
      <p>Overall, this study demonstrates that the relationship between NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing is not a stable linear correlation, but undergoes structural reconfiguration under varying emission and meteorological conditions. These findings provide important insights for understanding synergistic mechanisms of compound pollution, assessing joint risks of extreme pollution events, and formulating seasonally differentiated control strategies. Furthermore, the proposed framework establishes a methodological foundation for extending multivariate copula models in future studies.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec6">
      <title>Acknowledgements</title>
      <p>Sincere thanks to the members of JAMP for their professional performance, and special thanks to managing editor <italic>Hellen XU</italic> for a rare attitude of high quality.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <title>References</title>
      <ref id="B1">
        <label>1.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">He, C., Pan, F. and Yan, Y. (2011) Is Economic Transition Harmful to China’s Urban Environment? Evidence from Industrial Air Pollution in Chinese Cities. <italic>Urban</italic><italic>Studies</italic>, 49, 1767-1790. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011415719 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0042098011415719</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011415719">https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011415719</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>He, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Pan, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yan, Y.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2011</year>
            <article-title>Is Economic Transition Harmful to China’s Urban Environment? Evidence from Industrial Air Pollution in Chinese Cities</article-title>
            <source>Urban Studies</source>
            <volume>49</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0042098011415719</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B2">
        <label>2.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Ebenstein, A., Fan, M., Greenstone, M., He, G., Yin, P. and Zhou, M. (2015) Growth, Pollution, and Life Expectancy: China from 1991-2012. <italic>American</italic><italic>Economic</italic><italic>Review</italic>, 105, 226-231. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151094 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1257/aer.p20151094</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151094">https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151094</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Ebenstein, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Fan, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Greenstone, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>He, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yin, P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhou, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Growth, P</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2015</year>
            <article-title>Growth, Pollution, and Life Expectancy: China from 1991-2012</article-title>
            <source>American Economic Review</source>
            <volume>105</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1257/aer.p20151094</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B3">
        <label>3.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Li, G., Li, L., Liu, D., Qin, J. and Zhu, H. (2021) Effect of PM <sub>2.5</sub> Pollution on Perinatal Mortality in China. <italic>Scientific</italic><italic>Reports</italic>, 11, Article No. 7596. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87218-7 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-021-87218-7</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33828199</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87218-7">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87218-7</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Li, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Liu, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Qin, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhu, H.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>Effect of PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 Pollution on Perinatal Mortality in China. Scientific Reports</source>
            <volume>11</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-021-87218-7</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33828199</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B4">
        <label>4.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Li, S., Zhou, C. and Qu, M. (2023) Spatiotemporal Variations and Mechanism of PM2.5 Pollution in Urban Area: The Case of Guiyang, Guizhou, China. <italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Management</italic>, 341, Article ID: 118030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118030 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118030</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37172348</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118030">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118030</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Li, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhou, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Qu, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Guiyang, G</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2023</year>
            <article-title>Spatiotemporal Variations and Mechanism of PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 Pollution in Urban Area: The Case of Guiyang</source>
            <volume>341</volume>
            <fpage>118030</fpage>
            <elocation-id>ID</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118030</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37172348</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B5">
        <label>5.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Lim, S.S., Vos, T., Flaxman, A.D., Danaei, G., Shibuya, K., Adair-Rohani, H., <italic>et al</italic>. (2012) A Comparative Risk Assessment of Burden of Disease and Injury Attributable to 67 Risk Factors and Risk Factor Clusters in 21 Regions, 1990-2010. <italic>The</italic><italic>Lancet</italic>, 380, 2224-2260.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Lim, S.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Vos, T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Flaxman, A.D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Danaei, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Shibuya, K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Adair-Rohani, H.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>A Comparative Risk Assessment of Burden of Disease and Injury Attributable to 67 Risk Factors and Risk Factor Clusters in 21 Regions, 1990-2010</article-title>
            <source>The Lancet</source>
            <volume>380</volume>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B6">
        <label>6.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Nelsen, R.B. (2006) An Introduction to Copulas. Springer.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Nelsen, R.B.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2006</year>
            <article-title>An Introduction to Copulas</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B7">
        <label>7.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Masseran, N. (2021) Modeling the Characteristics of Unhealthy Air Pollution Events: A Copula Approach. <italic>International</italic><italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Research</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Public</italic><italic>Health</italic>, 18, Article No. 8751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168751 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ijerph18168751</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34444503</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168751">https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168751</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Masseran, N.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>Modeling the Characteristics of Unhealthy Air Pollution Events: A Copula Approach</article-title>
            <source>International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health</source>
            <volume>18</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ijerph18168751</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34444503</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B8">
        <label>8.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Kumar, P. (2018) Copula Functions and Applications in Engineering. In: Deep, K., Jain, M. and Salhi, S., Eds., <italic>Logistics</italic>, <italic>Supply Chain and Financial Predictive Analytics</italic>: <italic>Theory and Practices</italic>, Springer, 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0872-7_15 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-981-13-0872-7_15</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0872-7_15">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0872-7_15</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Kumar, P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Deep, K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Jain, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Salhi, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Logistics, S</string-name>
              <string-name>Practices, S</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2018</year>
            <article-title>Copula Functions and Applications in Engineering</article-title>
            <source>In: Deep</source>
            <volume>195</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-981-13-0872-7_15</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B9">
        <label>9.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Oppenheimer, M., Little, C.M. and Cooke, R.M. (2016) Expert Judgement and Uncertainty Quantification for Climate Change. <italic>Nature</italic><italic>Climate</italic><italic>Change</italic>, 6, 445-451. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2959 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nclimate2959</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2959">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2959</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Oppenheimer, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Little, C.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Cooke, R.M.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2016</year>
            <article-title>Expert Judgement and Uncertainty Quantification for Climate Change</article-title>
            <source>Nature Climate Change</source>
            <volume>6</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nclimate2959</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B10">
        <label>10.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Abbasi, M.T., Alesheikh, A.A., Jafari, A. and Lotfata, A. (2024) Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Urban Air Pollution in Tehran with a Focus on PM <sub>2.5</sub> and Associated Pollutants. <italic>Scientific</italic><italic>Reports</italic>, 14, Article No. 25150. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75678-6 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-024-75678-6</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39448642</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75678-6">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75678-6</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Abbasi, M.T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alesheikh, A.A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Jafari, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Lotfata, A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Urban Air Pollution in Tehran with a Focus on PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 and Associated Pollutants. Scientific Reports</source>
            <volume>14</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-024-75678-6</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39448642</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B11">
        <label>11.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Zhang, J., Li, Y., Liu, C., Wu, B. and Shi, K. (2022) A Study of Cross-Correlations between PM <sub>2.5</sub> and O <sub>3</sub> Based on Copula and Multifractal Methods. <italic>Physica</italic><italic>A</italic>: <italic>Statistical</italic><italic>Mechanics</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Its</italic><italic>Applications</italic>, 589, Article ID: 126651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.126651 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2021.126651</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.126651">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.126651</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zhang, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Liu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wu, B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Shi, K.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>A Study of Cross-Correlations between PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 and O3 Based on Copula and Multifractal Methods. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications</source>
            <volume>589</volume>
            <fpage>126651</fpage>
            <elocation-id>ID</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2021.126651</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B12">
        <label>12.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Sohrabian, B. (2021) Geostatistical Prediction through Convex Combination of Archimedean Copulas. <italic>Spatial</italic><italic>Statistics</italic>, 41, Article ID: 100488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100488 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100488</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100488">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100488</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Sohrabian, B.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>Geostatistical Prediction through Convex Combination of Archimedean Copulas</article-title>
            <source>Spatial Statistics</source>
            <volume>41</volume>
            <fpage>100488</fpage>
            <elocation-id>ID</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100488</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B13">
        <label>13.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Masseran, N. and Hussain, S.I. (2020) Copula Modelling on the Dynamic Dependence Structure of Multiple Air Pollutant Variables. <italic>Mathematics</italic>, 8, Article No. 1910. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8111910 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/math8111910</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/math8111910">https://doi.org/10.3390/math8111910</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Masseran, N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Hussain, S.I.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Copula Modelling on the Dynamic Dependence Structure of Multiple Air Pollutant Variables</article-title>
            <source>Mathematics</source>
            <volume>8</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/math8111910</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B14">
        <label>14.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Sak, H., Yang, G., Li, B. and Li, W. (2017) A Copula-Based Model for Air Pollution Portfolio Risk and Its Efficient Simulation. <italic>Stochastic</italic><italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Research</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Risk</italic><italic>Assessment</italic>, 31, 2607-2616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1403-2 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00477-017-1403-2</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1403-2">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1403-2</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Sak, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yang, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, W.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2017</year>
            <article-title>A Copula-Based Model for Air Pollution Portfolio Risk and Its Efficient Simulation</article-title>
            <source>Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment</source>
            <volume>31</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00477-017-1403-2</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B15">
        <label>15.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Chan, R.K.S. and So, M.K.P. (2018) Multivariate Modelling of Spatial Extremes Based on Copulas. <italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Statistical</italic><italic>Computation</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Simulation</italic>, 88, 2404-2424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2018.1465571 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/00949655.2018.1465571</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2018.1465571">https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2018.1465571</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Chan, R.K.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>So, M.K.P.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2018</year>
            <article-title>Multivariate Modelling of Spatial Extremes Based on Copulas</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation</source>
            <volume>88</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/00949655.2018.1465571</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B16">
        <label>16.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Qian, L., Wang, X. and Wang, Z. (2020) Modeling the Dependence Pattern between Two Precipitation Variables Using a Coupled Copula. <italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Earth</italic><italic>Sciences</italic>, 79, Article No. 486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09233-7 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s12665-020-09233-7</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09233-7">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09233-7</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Qian, L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, X.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, Z.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Modeling the Dependence Pattern between Two Precipitation Variables Using a Coupled Copula</article-title>
            <source>Environmental Earth Sciences</source>
            <volume>79</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s12665-020-09233-7</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B17">
        <label>17.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="thesis">Veerman, R. (2022) Modeling Dependence between Financial Markets: A Copula Approach, Master’s Thesis, University of Amsterdam.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="thesis">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Veerman, R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Approach, M</string-name>
              <string-name>Thesis, U</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>Modeling Dependence between Financial Markets: A Copula Approach, Master’s Thesis, University of Amsterdam</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B18">
        <label>18.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Gontara, E. and Chebana, F. (2025) Mixture Copula Parameter Estimation with Metaheuristic Algorithms, Comparative Study under Hydrological Context. <italic>Stochastic</italic><italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Research</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Risk</italic><italic>Assessment</italic>, 39, 1307-1326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-025-02914-4 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00477-025-02914-4</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-025-02914-4">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-025-02914-4</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Gontara, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Chebana, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Algorithms, C</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2025</year>
            <article-title>Mixture Copula Parameter Estimation with Metaheuristic Algorithms, Comparative Study under Hydrological Context</article-title>
            <source>Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment</source>
            <volume>39</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00477-025-02914-4</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B19">
        <label>19.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Arakelian, V. and Karlis, D. (2014) Clustering Dependencies via Mixtures of Copulas. <italic>Communications</italic><italic>in</italic><italic>Statistics</italic>— <italic>Simulation</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Computation</italic>, 43, 1644-1661. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2012.752832 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03610918.2012.752832</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2012.752832">https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2012.752832</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Arakelian, V.</string-name>
              <string-name>Karlis, D.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2014</year>
            <article-title>Clustering Dependencies via Mixtures of Copulas</article-title>
            <source>Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation</source>
            <volume>43</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03610918.2012.752832</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B20">
        <label>20.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Chi, Y., Ren, Y., Xu, C. and Zhan, Y. (2024) The Spatial Distribution Mechanism of PM <sub>2.5</sub> and NO <sub>2</sub> on the Eastern Coast of China. <italic>Environmental</italic><italic>Pollution</italic>, 342, Article ID: 123122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123122 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123122</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38070643</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123122">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123122</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Chi, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ren, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Xu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhan, Y.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>The Spatial Distribution Mechanism of PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 and NO2 on the Eastern Coast of China. Environmental Pollution</source>
            <volume>342</volume>
            <fpage>123122</fpage>
            <elocation-id>ID</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123122</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38070643</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B21">
        <label>21.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Gómez-Carracedo, M.P., Andrade, J.M., López-Mahía, P., Muniategui, S. and Prada, D. (2014) A Practical Comparison of Single and Multiple Imputation Methods to Handle Complex Missing Data in Air Quality Datasets. <italic>Chemometrics</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Intelligent</italic><italic>Laboratory</italic><italic>Systems</italic>, 134, 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.02.007 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.02.007</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.02.007">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.02.007</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Carracedo, M.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Andrade, J.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Muniategui, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Prada, D.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2014</year>
            <article-title>A Practical Comparison of Single and Multiple Imputation Methods to Handle Complex Missing Data in Air Quality Datasets</article-title>
            <source>Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems</source>
            <volume>134</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.02.007</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B22">
        <label>22.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Umar, N. and Gray, A. (2023) Comparing Single and Multiple Imputation Approaches for Missing Values in Univariate and Multivariate Water Level Data. <italic>Water</italic>, 15, Article No. 1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081519 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/w15081519</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081519">https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081519</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Umar, N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Gray, A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2023</year>
            <article-title>Comparing Single and Multiple Imputation Approaches for Missing Values in Univariate and Multivariate Water Level Data</article-title>
            <source>Water</source>
            <volume>15</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/w15081519</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B23">
        <label>23.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Junninen, H., Niska, H., Tuppurainen, K., Ruuskanen, J. and Kolehmainen, M. (2004) Methods for Imputation of Missing Values in Air Quality Data Sets. <italic>Atmospheric</italic><italic>Environment</italic>, 38, 2895-2907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.026 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.026</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.026">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.026</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Junninen, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Niska, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Tuppurainen, K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ruuskanen, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kolehmainen, M.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2004</year>
            <article-title>Methods for Imputation of Missing Values in Air Quality Data Sets</article-title>
            <source>Atmospheric Environment</source>
            <volume>38</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.026</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B24">
        <label>24.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="book">Durante, F. and Sempi, C. (2015) Principles of Copula Theory. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b18674 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1201/b18674</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1201/b18674">https://doi.org/10.1201/b18674</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="book">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Durante, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Sempi, C.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2015</year>
            <article-title>Principles of Copula Theory</article-title>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1201/b18674</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B25">
        <label>25.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Flores, M.U., de Amo, E., Durante, A.F. and Sánchez, J.F. (2017) Copulas and Dependence Models with Applications. Springer.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Flores, M.U.</string-name>
              <string-name>Amo, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Durante, A.F.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2017</year>
            <article-title>Copulas and Dependence Models with Applications</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B26">
        <label>26.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Talbi, M., de Peretti, C. and Belkacem, L. (2020) Dynamics and Causality in Distribution between Spot and Future Precious Metals: A Copula Approach. <italic>Resources</italic><italic>Policy</italic>, 66, Article ID: 101645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101645 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101645</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101645">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101645</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Talbi, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Peretti, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Belkacem, L.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Dynamics and Causality in Distribution between Spot and Future Precious Metals: A Copula Approach</article-title>
            <source>Resources Policy</source>
            <volume>66</volume>
            <fpage>101645</fpage>
            <elocation-id>ID</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101645</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B27">
        <label>27.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Han, S., Qiao, Y., Yan, J., Liu, Y., Li, L. and Wang, Z. (2019) Mid-to-Long Term Wind and Photovoltaic Power Generation Prediction Based on Copula Function and Long Short Term Memory Network. <italic>Applied</italic><italic>Energy</italic>, 239, 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.193 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.193</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.193">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.193</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Han, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Qiao, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yan, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Liu, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, Z.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2019</year>
            <article-title>Mid-to-Long Term Wind and Photovoltaic Power Generation Prediction Based on Copula Function and Long Short Term Memory Network</article-title>
            <source>Applied Energy</source>
            <volume>239</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.193</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B28">
        <label>28.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Zhang, Y., Kim, C.W., Beer, M., Dai, H. and Soares, C.G. (2018) Modeling Multivariate Ocean Data Using Asymmetric Copulas. <italic>Coastal</italic><italic>Engineering</italic>, 135, 91-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.01.008 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.01.008</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.01.008">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.01.008</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zhang, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kim, C.W.</string-name>
              <string-name>Beer, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dai, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Soares, C.G.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2018</year>
            <article-title>Modeling Multivariate Ocean Data Using Asymmetric Copulas</article-title>
            <source>Coastal Engineering</source>
            <volume>135</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.01.008</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B29">
        <label>29.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Qu, L. and Lu, Y. (2019) Copula Density Estimation by Finite Mixture of Parametric Copula Densities. <italic>Communications</italic><italic>in</italic><italic>Statistics</italic><italic>-</italic><italic>Simulation</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Computation</italic>, 50, 3315-3337. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2019.1622720 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03610918.2019.1622720</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2019.1622720">https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2019.1622720</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Qu, L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Lu, Y.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2019</year>
            <article-title>Copula Density Estimation by Finite Mixture of Parametric Copula Densities</article-title>
            <source>Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation</source>
            <volume>50</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03610918.2019.1622720</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B30">
        <label>30.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Zucchini, W. (2000) An Introduction to Model Selection. <italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Mathematical</italic><italic>Psychology</italic>, 44, 41-61. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmps.1999.1276 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1006/jmps.1999.1276</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10733857</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1006/jmps.1999.1276">https://doi.org/10.1006/jmps.1999.1276</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zucchini, W.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2000</year>
            <article-title>An Introduction to Model Selection</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Mathematical Psychology</source>
            <volume>44</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1006/jmps.1999.1276</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10733857</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B31">
        <label>31.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="book">Joe, H. (2014) Dependence Modeling with Copulas. CRC Press.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="book">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Joe, H.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2014</year>
            <article-title>Dependence Modeling with Copulas</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B32">
        <label>32.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Genest, C., Rémillard, B. and Beaudoin, D. (2009) Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Copulas: A Review and a Power Study. <italic>Insurance</italic>: <italic>Mathematics</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Economics</italic>, 44, 199-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2007.10.005 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.insmatheco.2007.10.005</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2007.10.005">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2007.10.005</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Genest, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Beaudoin, D.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2009</year>
            <article-title>Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Copulas: A Review and a Power Study</article-title>
            <source>Insurance: Mathematics and Economics</source>
            <volume>44</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.insmatheco.2007.10.005</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B33">
        <label>33.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Jain, A.K., Murty, M.N. and Flynn, P.J. (1999) Data Clustering: A Review. <italic>ACM</italic><italic>Computing</italic><italic>Surveys</italic>, 31, 264-323. https://doi.org/10.1145/331499.331504 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1145/331499.331504</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1145/331499.331504">https://doi.org/10.1145/331499.331504</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Jain, A.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Murty, M.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Flynn, P.J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>1999</year>
            <article-title>Data Clustering: A Review</article-title>
            <source>ACM Computing Surveys</source>
            <volume>31</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1145/331499.331504</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B34">
        <label>34.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">D’Urso, P., De Giovanni, L. and Massari, R. (2015) Time Series Clustering by a Robust Autoregressive Metric with Application to Air Pollution. <italic>Chemometrics</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Intelligent</italic><italic>Laboratory</italic><italic>Systems</italic>, 141, 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.11.003 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.11.003</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.11.003">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.11.003</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Urso, P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Giovanni, L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Massari, R.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2015</year>
            <article-title>Time Series Clustering by a Robust Autoregressive Metric with Application to Air Pollution</article-title>
            <source>Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems</source>
            <volume>141</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.chemolab.2014.11.003</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B35">
        <label>35.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Liao, T.W. (2005) Clustering of Time Series Data—A Survey. <italic>Pattern</italic><italic>Recognition</italic>, 38, 1857-1874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.025 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.025</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.025">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.025</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Liao, T.W.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2005</year>
            <article-title>Clustering of Time Series Data—A Survey</article-title>
            <source>Pattern Recognition</source>
            <volume>38</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.025</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B36">
        <label>36.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Lu, W.Z., He, H.D. and Dong, L.Y. (2011) Performance Assessment of Air Quality Monitoring Networks Using Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis. <italic>Building</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Environment</italic>, 46, 577-583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.004 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.004</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.004">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.004</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Lu, W.Z.</string-name>
              <string-name>He, H.D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dong, L.Y.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2011</year>
            <article-title>Performance Assessment of Air Quality Monitoring Networks Using Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis</article-title>
            <source>Building and Environment</source>
            <volume>46</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.004</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B37">
        <label>37.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Ahmed, M., Seraj, R. and Islam, S.M.S. (2020) The K-Means Algorithm: A Comprehensive Survey and Performance Evaluation. <italic>Electronics</italic>, 9, Article No. 1295. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9081295 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/electronics9081295</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9081295">https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9081295</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Ahmed, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Seraj, R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Islam, S.M.S.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>The K-Means Algorithm: A Comprehensive Survey and Performance Evaluation</article-title>
            <source>Electronics</source>
            <volume>9</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/electronics9081295</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B38">
        <label>38.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Wan, Z., Yang, C., Wang, X., Xue, Y., Zhao, J., Cui, J., <italic>et al</italic>. (2024) Spatial and Temporal Differentiation of Air Quality and Its Influence Factors in 16 Cities in Shandong Province from 2019 to 2020. <italic>RSC</italic><italic>Sustainability</italic>, 2, 1528-1542. https://doi.org/10.1039/d4su00128a <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1039/d4su00128a</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/d4su00128a">https://doi.org/10.1039/d4su00128a</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Wan, Z.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yang, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, X.</string-name>
              <string-name>Xue, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhao, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Cui, J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Spatial and Temporal Differentiation of Air Quality and Its Influence Factors in 16 Cities in Shandong Province from 2019 to 2020</article-title>
            <source>RSC Sustainability</source>
            <volume>2</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1039/d4su00128a</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B39">
        <label>39.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Zhong, J., Zhang, X., Dong, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, C., Wang, J., <italic>et al</italic>. (2018) Feedback Effects of Boundary-Layer Meteorological Factors on Cumulative Explosive Growth of PM <sub>2.5</sub> during Winter Heavy Pollution Episodes in Beijing from 2013 to 2016. <italic>Atmospheric</italic><italic>Chemistry</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Physics</italic>, 18, 247-258. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-247-2018 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-18-247-2018</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-247-2018">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-247-2018</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zhong, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhang, X.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dong, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Liu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2018</year>
            <article-title>Feedback Effects of Boundary-Layer Meteorological Factors on Cumulative Explosive Growth of PM2</article-title>
            <source>5 during Winter Heavy Pollution Episodes in Beijing from 2013 to 2016. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</source>
            <volume>18</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-18-247-2018</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B40">
        <label>40.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Huang, R.J., Zhang, Y., Bozzetti, C., Ho, K.F., Cao, J.J., Han, Y., <italic>et al</italic>. (2014) High Secondary Aerosol Contribution to Particulate Pollution during Haze Events in China. <italic>Nature</italic>, 514, 218-222. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13774 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature13774</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25231863</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13774">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13774</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Huang, R.J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhang, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Bozzetti, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ho, K.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Cao, J.J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Han, Y.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2014</year>
            <article-title>High Secondary Aerosol Contribution to Particulate Pollution during Haze Events in China</article-title>
            <source>Nature</source>
            <volume>514</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature13774</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25231863</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B41">
        <label>41.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Zhao, D., Liu, G., Xin, J., Quan, J., Wang, Y., Wang, X., <italic>et al</italic>. (2020) Haze Pollution under a High Atmospheric Oxidization Capacity in Summer in Beijing: Insights into Formation Mechanism of Atmospheric Physicochemical Processes. <italic>Atmospheric</italic><italic>Chemistry</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Physics</italic>, 20, 4575-4592. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4575-2020 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-20-4575-2020</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4575-2020">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4575-2020</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zhao, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Liu, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Xin, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Quan, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wang, X.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Haze Pollution under a High Atmospheric Oxidization Capacity in Summer in Beijing: Insights into Formation Mechanism of Atmospheric Physicochemical Processes</article-title>
            <source>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</source>
            <volume>20</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-20-4575-2020</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B42">
        <label>42.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Wang, D., Zhou, B., Fu, Q., Zhao, Q., Zhang, Q., Chen, J., <italic>et al</italic>. (2016) Intense Secondary Aerosol Formation Due to Strong Atmospheric Photochemical Reactions in Summer: Observations at a Rural Site in Eastern Yangtze River Delta of China. <italic>Science</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>the</italic><italic>Total</italic><italic>Environment</italic>, 571, 1454-1466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.212 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.212</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27418517</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.212">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.212</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Wang, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhou, B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Fu, Q.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhao, Q.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zhang, Q.</string-name>
              <string-name>Chen, J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2016</year>
            <article-title>Intense Secondary Aerosol Formation Due to Strong Atmospheric Photochemical Reactions in Summer: Observations at a Rural Site in Eastern Yangtze River Delta of China</article-title>
            <source>Science of the Total Environment</source>
            <volume>571</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.212</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27418517</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>