MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392644507 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-20788

Advancing Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment in Coastal Regions: Integrating Machine Learning and Traditional Frameworks

2024· preprint· en· W4392644507 on OpenAlexaff
Rahim Barzegar, Fatemeh Jafarzadeh, Asghar Asghari Moghaddam, Siamak Razzagh, Vincent Cloutier, Éric Rosa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Vulnerability assessmentGroundwaterEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeologyPsychologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an innovative machine learning (ML)-enhanced method to assess groundwater vulnerability in coastal regions, with a specific focus on the Azarshahr plain near Urmia Lake in Northwestern Iran. Our methodology integrates the traditional DRASTIC and GALDIT frameworks to surpass their limitations (e.g. subjectivity) in varied contexts such as coastal and agricultural-industrial environments. The traditional frameworks including the DRASTIC framework form the core of our approach, featuring seven key layers: Depth to water [D], Net Recharge [R], Aquifer Media [A], Soil Media [S], Topography [T], Impact of Vadose Zone [I], and Hydraulic Conductivity [C], each meticulously developed with specific ratings and weights according to DRASTIC standards. Similarly, the GALDIT framework contributes a six-layer map, including Groundwater Occurrence [G], Aquifer Hydraulic Conductivity [A], Height of Groundwater Level [L], Distance from the Shore [D], Impact of Existing Seawater Intrusion Status [I], and Aquifer Thickness [T], each layer uniquely rated and weighted. To address the limitations of these traditional frameworks, our study integrates an advanced ML recalibration of the GALDIT and DRASTIC indices, using the maximum concentrations of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and Nitrate (NO3) in the study area as proxies. We employed a range of decision tree-based ML models, including Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), and Random Forest (RF), to predict the adjusted vulnerability indices, applying six predictors for GALDIT and seven for DRASTIC. These models were trained and validated on a dataset split into 70% for training and 30% for validation. Our results indicate that the traditional DRASTIC indices correlate weakly with NO3 concentrations. However, the ML-augmented models, particularly AdaBoost, significantly improved predictive accuracy. Likewise, GALDIT results were greatly enhanced by incorporating the AdaBoost model. A key innovation in our research is the development of a sophisticated meta-ensemble ML model. This model, based on the most effective AdaBoost applications in the DRASTIC and GALDIT assessments, marks a significant methodological advancement. It integrates vulnerabilities from both frameworks using a Fuzzy operation and then redeveloping a meta-ensemble ML model. This comprehensive model demonstrated exceptional performance, highlighting the effectiveness of our integrated ML approach in providing a more detailed, accurate, and robust assessment of coastal aquifer vulnerability. Moreover, our study includes an extensive spatial analysis of groundwater vulnerability in the Azarshahr plain. The DRASTIC model indicated varying vulnerability levels, with heightened susceptibility in central and southern regions, albeit showing a weaker correlation with NO3 concentrations. Conversely, AdaBoost exhibited a strong correlation with actual NO3 levels, showcasing its predictive capability. The GALDIT index identified several high-risk areas, particularly those vulnerable to seawater intrusion, with the AdaBoost-enhanced model outperforming other ML approaches. Our comprehensive AdaBoost meta-ensemble model merges insights from both NO3 and TDS evaluations, offering a holistic groundwater vulnerability. This model is crucial for informed decision-making, identifying areas where NO3 and TDS risks converge. Its spatial analysis strongly correlates 'Very High' vulnerability zones with high NO3 and TDS concentrations, confirming its integrative efficiency in environmental risk assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207