ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2021
Groundwater vulnerability mapping using the modified DRASTIC model: the metaheuristic algorithm approach.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- An integrated groundwater vulnerability and artificial recharge site suitability assessment using GIS multi-criteria decision making approach in Kayseri region, Turkey.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2024Article
- A hybrid statistical decision-making optimization approach for groundwater vulnerability considering uncertainty.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- New DRASTIC framework for groundwater vulnerability assessment: bivariate and multi-criteria decision-making approach coupled with metaheuristic algorithm.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Modeling of aquifer vulnerability index using deep learning neural networks coupling with optimization algorithms.Environmental science and pollution research international · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vulnerability assessment and mapping is a significant tool for sustainable management of the precious natural groundwater resources. DRASTIC is an extensively used index model to map groundwater vulnerable zones. However, the original DRASTIC model rates and weights used in most of the research depict the poor correlation between nitrate concentration and groundwater vulnerability index. Wilcoxon test and five population-based metaheuristic (MH) algorithms, namely, firefly algorithm (FA), invasive weed optimization (IWO), teaching learning-based optimization (TLBO), shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA), and particle swarm optimization (PSO), were used to optimize the rates and weights of the DRASTIC model to improve its accuracy. The performance of all the employed metaheuristic algorithms converges to a global optimal solution at different iterations, and to choose the best algorithm for DRASTIC weights optimization, a ranking methodology was proposed. The algorithms were ranked by calculating the relative closeness of alternatives with computational speed and the number of iterations as attributes in the TOPSIS method. This study identifies FA as the outperforming algorithm among the employed for this specified weight optimization problem based on ranking. The result of the optimization model proposed depicts significant improvement in the correlation coefficient between the groundwater vulnerability index and nitrate concentration from 0.0545 for the original DRASTIC model to 0.7247 for the Wilcoxon-MH- DRASTIC. Hence, this ranking approach can be adopted when global optimal solution is found by all employed algorithms in DRASTIC weight optimization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33389229What 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.