ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Modeling groundwater quality by using hybrid intelligent and geostatistical methods.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpolation methods for spatial distribution of groundwater mapping electrical conductivity.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Data-driven soft computing modeling of groundwater quality parameters in southeast Nigeria: comparing the performances of different algorithms.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Development of artificial intelligence models for well groundwater quality simulation: Different modeling scenarios.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simulation of groundwater quality is important for managing water resources and mitigating water shortages, especially in arid and semiarid areas. Geostatistical models have been used for spatial prediction and interpolation of groundwater parameters. Recently, hybrid intelligent models have been employed for the simulation of dynamic systems. In this study, hybrid intelligent models, based on a neuro-fuzzy system integrated with fuzzy c-means data clustering (FCM) and grid partition (GP) models as well as artificial neural networks integrated with particle swarm optimization algorithm, were used to predict the spatial distribution of chlorine (Cl), electrical conductivity (EC), and sodium absorption ratio (SAR) parameters of groundwater. Results of the hybrid models were compared with geostatistical methods, including kriging, inverse distance weighting (IDW), and radial basis function (RBF). The latitude and longitude values of observation wells and qualitative parameters in three states of maximum, average, and minimum were introduced as input and output to the models, respectively. To evaluate the models, the root mean squared error (RMSE), the mean absolute error (MAE), and CC statistical criteria were used. Results showed that in the hybrid models, NF-GP with the lowest RMSE and MAE and highest CC was the most suitable model for the prediction of water quality parameters. The RMSE, MAE, and CC values were 107.175 (mg/L), 79.804 (mg/L), and 0.924 in the average state for Cl; were 518.544 (μmho/cm), 444.152 (μmho/cm), and 0.882 for electrical conductivity; and were 1.596, 1.350, and 0.582 for sodium absorption ratio, respectively. Among the geostatistical models, the kriging was found more accurate. Using the coordinates of wells will eventually allow the NF-GP to be used for more sampling and replace the visual techniques that require more time, cost, and facilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32415439What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.