## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**ATE Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & **RMSE** & **RMSE** & **MAE** & **MAPE** & **CC** \\ \hline \({}^{*}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & 4.611 & 4.464 & 1.711 & 14.862 & 0.949 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 5.607 & 5.313 & 2.277 & 21.015 & 0.933 \\ NPAR & 5.730 & 4.845 & 2.067 & 17.830 & 0.922 \\ ARIMA & 4.709 & 4.683 & 2.033 & 19.601 & 0.947 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Campo de Marte Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & **RMSE** & **RMSE** & **MAE** & **MAPE** & **CC** \\ \hline \({}^{*}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & 3.637 & 11.846 & 2.356 & 20.441 & 0.978 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 5.485 & 16.957 & 3.679 & 26.817 & 0.949 \\ NPAR & 5.579 & 16.845 & 3.776 & 26.481 & 0.947 \\ ARIMA & 4.187 & 12.464 & 2.984 & 24.150 & 0.971 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**San Borja Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & **RMSE** & **RMSE** & **MAE** & **MAPE** & **CC** \\ \hline \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & 1.495 & 1.864 & 1.078 & 7.668 & 0.989 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 2.213 & 2.872 & 1.664 & 11.793 & 0.974 \\ NPAR & 2.231 & 2.711 & 1.680 & 11.819 & 0.973 \\ ARIMA & 1.721 & 2.021 & 1.301 & 9.293 & 0.985 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Santa Anita Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & **RMSE** & **RMSE** & **MAE** & **MAPE** & **CC** \\ \hline \({}^{*}\)STLD\({}^{b}\) & 1.969 & 15.924 & 1.462 & 76.261 & 0.989 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 5.319 & 41.263 & 3.977 & 199.487 & 0.915 \\ NPAR & 5.375 & 40.769 & 3.979 & 191.434 & 0.912 \\ ARIMA & 3.991 & 33.742 & 2.979 & 160.368 & 0.953 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Ozone concentration in four Metropolitan Lima stations (\(\text{ug}/\text{m}^{3}\)): mean accuracy measures of the proposed versus the baseline models. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**ATE Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & \({}^{*}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & **PAR** & **NPAR** & **ARIMA** \\ \hline \({}^{*}\)STLD\({}^{b}\) & - & 0.999 & 0.995 & 0.927 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 0.001 & - & 0.662 & 0.001 \\ NPAR & 0.005 & 0.338 & - & 0.006 \\ ARIMA & 0.073 & 0.999 & 0.995 & - \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Campo de Marte Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & **PAR** & **NPAR** & **ARIMA** \\ \hline \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & - & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 0.000 & - & 0.926 & 0.000 \\ NPAR & 0.000 & 0.074 & 0.000 & - \\ ARIMA & 0.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 & - \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**San Borja Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & **PAR** & **NPAR** & **ARIMA** \\ \hline \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & - & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 0.000 & - & 0.907 & 0.000 \\ NPAR & 0.000 & 0.093 & 0.000 \\ ARIMA & 0.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 & - \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Santa Anita Station**} \\ \hline
**Models** & \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}_{x}\) & **PAR** & **NPAR** & **ARIMA** \\ \hline \({}^{b}\)STLD\({}^{b}\) & - & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ PAR\({}^{*}\) & 0.000 & 0.995 & 0.000 \\ NPAR & 0.000 & 0.005 & 0.000 \\ ARIMA & 0.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Ozone concentration in four Metropolitan Lima stations (\(\text{ug}/\text{m}^{3}\)): results (\(p\)-value) of the DM test for the final best-proposed model versus the baseline models given in Table 6.  
the ozone concentration model is represented exclusively as a function of time as a relevant factor without considering meteorological factors, the decomposition methods have shown great performance, since in this investigation the significant models (\(p<0.05\); R\({}^{2}\) max: 0.949) with errors less than 20% (RMSE, RMSPE, MAE, MAPE) showed great performance. These errors have been comparable to other STL decomposition studies that used root mean square error (RMSE: 6.8%) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE: 10.49%) as benchmarks for forecast reliability for ozone [10].