2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2021.104244
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing four machine learning model performances in forecasting the alluvial aquifer level in a semi-arid region

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…kNN and SVM models had a lower performance for simulating the SSL in all studied stations. This is in agreement with previous published studies, such as Wang et al [49] and El Bilali et al [14], where their findings demonstrated that the tree-based and ANN models are more accurate than SVM and k-NN ones. Regarding the SSL prediction, ref.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…kNN and SVM models had a lower performance for simulating the SSL in all studied stations. This is in agreement with previous published studies, such as Wang et al [49] and El Bilali et al [14], where their findings demonstrated that the tree-based and ANN models are more accurate than SVM and k-NN ones. Regarding the SSL prediction, ref.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Indeed, their construction relies on the statistical input-output equation rather than explaining the mechanism involved in the process. Recently, several studies showed that the data-based models are powerful tools to overcome some limitations of the conceptual-based models in predicting the water resources status [14][15][16][17][18]. For instance, ref.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The traditional hydrogeochemical software such as MINTEQA2, WATEQ, Netpath, EQ3/6 and PHREEQC/QE are constantly upgraded (Zhang and Zhang, 2019), and the functions of groundwater flow numerical simulation software such as GMS, MODFLOW and FEFLOW are more and more perfect (Li et al, 2021;Liu et al, 2022a). Neural network learning, deep learning and machine learning based on big data have been widely applied to solve the problem of highdimensional uncertain GCE (Mo, 2019;El Bilali et al, 2021). For example, explored the low-temperature hydrogeological process of frozen soil environment through three-dimensional numerical simulation (Liu et al, 2022b).…”
Section: New Methods Of Groundwater Chemical Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…( 2) Techniques for multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), such as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) (Kumar et al 2020;Murmu et al 2019) and TOPSIS (Mandal et al 2021;Zaree et al 2019). Experts' judgment has tuned semiquantitative models (AHP), but for comparable geo-environmental elements or locations, the models need extensive understanding of groundwater and conditioning variables, which is seldom accessible (El Bilali et al 2021;Mogaji et al 2016). Statistical approaches have been widely regarded as the best way for GWP mapping at sizes of 1:20,000 to 1:50,000, as they can map springs and wells in detail (Mallick et al 2021a;Arshad et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%