AI for Water Sustainability: Global Water Quality Assessment and Prediction with Explainable AI with LLM Chatbot for Insights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring safe water supplies requires effective water quality monitoring, especially in developing countries like Nepal, where contamination risks are high. This paper introduces various hybrid deep learning models to predict on the CCME dataset with multiple water quality parameters from Canada, China, the UK, the USA, and Ireland, with 2.82 million data records feature-engineered and evaluated using them. Models such as CatBoost, XGBoost, and Extra Trees, along with neural networks combining CNN and LSTM layers, are used to capture temporal and spatial patterns in the data. The model demonstrated notable accuracy improvements, aiding proactive water quality control. CatBoost, XGBoost, and Extra Trees Regressor predicted Water Quality Index (WQI) values with an average RMSE of 1.2 and an R squared score of 0.99. Additionally, classifiers achieved 99% accuracy, cross-validated across models. SHAP analysis showed the importance of indicators like F.R.C. and orthophosphate levels in hybrid architectures' classification decisions. The practical application is demonstrated along with a chatbot application for water quality insights.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".