Advancing non-optical water quality monitoring in Lake Tana, Ethiopia: insights from machine learning and remote sensing techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water quality is deteriorating in the world's freshwater bodies, and Lake Tana in Ethiopia is becoming unpleasant to biodiversity. The objective of this study is to retrieve non-optical water quality data, specifically total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) concentrations, in Lake Tana using Machine Learning (ML) techniques applied to Landsat 8 OLI imagery. The ML methods employed include Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), Support Vector Regression (SVR), Random Forest Regression (RF), XGBoost Regression (XGB), AdaBoost Regression (AB), and Gradient Boosting Regression (GB). The XGB algorithm provided the best result for TN retrieval, with determination coefficient (R2), mean absolute error (MARE), relative mean square error (RMSE) and Nash Sutcliff (NS) values of 0.80, 0.043, 0.52, and 0.81 mg/L, respectively. The RF algorithm was most effective for TP retrieval, with R2 of 0.73, MARE of 0.076, RMSE of 0.17 mg/L, and NS index of 0.74. These methods accurately predicted TN and TP spatial concentrations, identifying hotspots along river inlets and northeasters. The temporal patterns of TN, TP, and their ratios were also accurately represented by combining in-situ, RS and ML-based models. Our findings suggest that this approach can significantly improve the accuracy of water quality retrieval in large inland lakes and lead to the development of potential water quality digital services.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".