Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38058434›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Machine learning to support citizen science in urban environmental management.

Emily J Yang, Julian Fulton, Swabinash Swarnaraja, Cecile Carson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Emily J YangCalifornia State University Sacramento, 6000 J St. Sacramento, CA 95819-6001, USA.
Julian FultonCalifornia State University Sacramento, 6000 J St. Sacramento, CA 95819-6001, USA.
Swabinash SwarnarajaCalifornia State University Sacramento, 6000 J St. Sacramento, CA 95819-6001, USA.
Cecile CarsonKeep California Beautiful, 8665 S. Union Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93307, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) and citizen science (CS) are increasingly prevalent and rapidly evolving approaches to studying and managing environmental challenges. Municipal and other governance actors can benefit from technology advances in ML and public engagement benefits of CS but must also address validity and other quality assurance concerns in their application to particular management contexts. In this article, we take up the pervasive challenge of urban litter to demonstrate how ML can support CS by providing quality assurance in the regulatory context of California's stormwater program. We gave quantitative CS-collected data to five ML models to compare their predictions of a qualitative, site-specific, multiclass "Litter Index" score, an important regulatory metric typically only assessed by trained experts. XGBoost had the best outcome, with scores of 0.98 for accuracy, precision, recall and F-1. These strong results show that ML can provide a reliable complement to CS assessments and increase quality assurance in a regulatory context. To date, ML and CS have each contributed to litter management in novel ways and we find that their integration can provide important synergies with additional applications in other environmental management domains.

Indexed as

Citizen scienceCommunity monitoringLitterMachine learningStorm waterTrash

Identifiers

PMID38058434
PMCPMC10696195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.