Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41849421›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

A GeoAI framework for detecting risk zones from illegal dumping sites in Khulna, Bangladesh.

Swadhin Das, Md Manjur Morshed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Swadhin DasDepartment of Urban and Regional Planning, Khulna University of Engineering & Technology (KUET), Khulna, Bangladesh.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6410-646X
Md Manjur MorshedDepartment of Urban and Regional Planning, Khulna University of Engineering & Technology (KUET), Khulna, Bangladesh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Illegal dumping is a major challenge of municipal solid waste management. A significant portion of waste is dumped illegally in cities worldwide. This improper waste disposal creates serious ecological degradation, environmental hazards, public health risks, and urban planning challenges. This study presents a Positive-Unlabeled (PU) learning framework for detecting illegal dumping sites using GeoAI. Seven machine learning algorithms were trained on 70% of 341 confirmed illegal dumping sites across 10 m × 10 m resolution grids covering Khulna City Corporation, Bangladesh. The remaining 30% of the data was reserved for independent testing. The best model was selected using a weighted composite score combining the Area Under the Curve (AUC) and F1 score from spatial cross-validation, and the selected best model was subsequently evaluated on an independent hold-out test set. Random Forest achieved the highest AUC (0.883) and F1 score (0.820), and consistently outperformed other models across all weighting schemes. The three most influential predictors of illegal dumping were proximity to roads, drains, and buildings. The predicted risk map shows that the very high and high-risk zones are concentrated along roads and urban centers. This study introduces the first GeoAI framework for illegal dumping site detection in Khulna, Bangladesh. This framework can also be applied in other cities to detect illegal dumping sites at the community level. This methodology can help municipal authorities to develop a waste management plan that addresses both illegal dumping challenges and long-term infrastructure planning.

Indexed as

Refuse DisposalWaste Disposal FacilitiesWaste ManagementBangladeshCitiesMachine LearningRandom Forest

Identifiers

PMID41849421
PMCPMC12998811

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.