Stochastic Modeling of Groundwater Fluoride Contamination: Introducing Lazy Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While it remains the primary source of safe drinking and irrigation water in northwest Iran's Maku Plain, the region's groundwater is prone to fluoride contamination. Accordingly, modeling techniques to accurately predict groundwater fluoride concentration are required. The current paper advances several novel data mining algorithms including Lazy learners [instance‐based K‐nearest neighbors (IBK); locally weighted learning (LWL); and KStar], a tree‐based algorithm (M5P), and a meta classifier algorithm [regression by discretization (RBD)] to predict groundwater fluoride concentration. Drawing on several groundwater quality variables (e.g., concentrations), measured in each of 143 samples collected between 2004 and 2008, several models predicting groundwater fluoride concentrations were developed. The full dataset was divided into two subsets: 70% for model training (calibration) and 30% for model evaluation (validation). Models were validated using several statistical evaluation criteria and three visual evaluation approaches (i.e., scatter plots, Taylor and Violin diagrams). Although Na + and Ca 2+ showed the greatest positive and negative correlations with fluoride ( r = 0.59 and −0.39, respectively), they were insufficient to reliably predict fluoride levels; therefore, other water quality variables, including those weakly correlated with fluoride, should be considered as inputs for fluoride prediction. The IBK model outperformed other models in fluoride contamination prediction, followed by KStar, RBD, M5P, and LWL. The RBD and M5P models were the least accurate in terms of predicting peaks in fluoride concentration values. Results of the current study can be used to support practical and sustainable management of water and groundwater resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".