Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33219864›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2020

Comparative evaluation of machine learning models for groundwater quality assessment.

Shine Bedi, Ashok Samal, Chittaranjan Ray, Daniel Snow

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shine BediComputer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA. shinebedi9706@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8558-9509
Ashok SamalComputer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Chittaranjan RayNebraska Water Center, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Daniel SnowWater Sciences Laboratory, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA.
University of Nebraska–Lincoln · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contamination from pesticides and nitrate in groundwater is a significant threat to water quality in general and agriculturally intensive regions in particular. Three widely used machine learning models, namely, artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector machines (SVM), and extreme gradient boosting (XGB), were evaluated for their efficacy in predicting contamination levels using sparse data with non-linear relationships. The predictive ability of the models was assessed using a dataset consisting of 303 wells across 12 Midwestern states in the USA. Multiple hydrogeologic, water quality, and land use features were chosen as the independent variables, and classes were based on measured concentration ranges of nitrate and pesticide. This study evaluates the classification performance of the models for two, three, and four class scenarios and compares them with the corresponding regression models. The study also examines the issue of class imbalance and tests the efficacy of three class imbalance mitigation techniques: oversampling, weighting, and oversampling and weighting, for all the scenarios. The models' performance is reported using multiple metrics, both insensitive to class imbalance (accuracy) and sensitive to class imbalance (F1 score and MCC). Finally, the study assesses the importance of features using game-theoretic Shapley values to rank features consistently and offer model interpretability.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringGroundwaterMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerSupport Vector MachineArtificial neural networks (ANN)Data imbalanceFeature importanceGroundwater qualitySupport vector machines (SVM)XGBoost

Identifiers

PMID33219864
OpenAlexW3106300197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.