This study presents a comparative evaluation of high-volume samplers (HVS) and low-cost Airveda sensor-based platforms for monitoring particulate matter (PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅) concentrations in Kolkata during the pre-monsoon period from February to May 2018. Despite identical atmospheric conditions, notable discrepancies were observed between the two methods, attributed to differences in aerosol collection efficiency, sensitivity, and calibration protocols. HVS, based on gravimetric filtration, demonstrated higher accuracy and regulatory reliability, whereas Airveda employs optical sensing, which can be affected by humidity and aerosol properties. Bland-Altman analysis indicated systematic biases and heteroscedasticity in PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅ measurements, with greater divergence observed at higher concentrations. Regression results for PM₂.₅ suggested a fixed bias (mean difference: 19.35 µg/m³) with minimal proportional bias. Paired t-tests revealed statistically significant differences between HVS and Airveda for both PM₁₀ (p < 0.0001) and PM₂.₅ (p = 0.0004), confirming systematic measurement discrepancies. The PM₁₀ mean difference of 46.63 µg/m³ highlights methodological limitations in Airveda sensors for longer-term monitoring. These findings underscore the critical need for standardized calibration, correction factor application, and validation protocols to enhance inter-instrument comparability and data reliability. Integrating diverse measurement platforms, with appropriate calibration, can strengthen air quality surveillance frameworks and inform evidence-based policy interventions for urban air pollution mitigation.

Keywords: Particulate Matter; High Volume Sampler; Airveda; Air Pollution Monitoring; Statistical Assessment;