ArticleACS environmental Au2026
Development of Machine Learning Models to Predict Daily Gas Ebullition Flux in Waterways from Sediment Characteristics.
Article in ACS environmental Au, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gas ebullition plays a critical role in facilitating contaminant transport from the sediment to the water column. Predicting gas ebullition accurately is necessary for managing sediments and assessing sediment/water flux, and many researchers have published models to predict gas ebullition in lakes, ponds, and rivers. The need for site-specific data and a strong emphasis on water column parameters in published models (rather than sediment data where gas ebullition occurs), coupled with the narrow range of systems studied, limits the application of current published methods to predict ebullition. This study develops machine learning (ML) generalized models to predict gas ebullition accurately across a diverse range of waterways under various ecohydrological conditions. Input data are common sediment parameters, depth and temperature, and gas ebullition flux rates acquired through various methods. We trained and evaluated Multivariate Linear Regression (MLR), Random Forest (RF), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), and Neural Network (NN) models to predict gas flux using data from over 40 sites across all seasons. ML approaches significantly enhance prediction accuracy compared to results predicted by ten published regression models, most of which had low/no predictive capability for the waterway data set. Among the ML models, the results show that RF and XGB performed significantly better (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.