11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Groundwater Quality Assessment Based on the Random Forest Water Quality Index—Taking Karamay City as an Example

      , , , , , ,
      Sustainability
      MDPI AG

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In the past few decades, global industrial development and population growth have led to a scarcity of water resources, making sustainable management of groundwater a global challenge. The Water Quality Index (WQI) serves as a comprehensive method for assessing water quality and can provide valuable recommendations at the water quality level, optimizing policies for groundwater management. However, the subjectivity and uncertainty of the traditional WQI have negative impacts on evaluation outcomes, particularly in determining indicator weights and selecting aggregation functions. The proposed water quality index for groundwater based on the random forest (RFWQI) model in this study addresses these issues. It selects water quality indicators based on the actual pollution situation in the study area, employs an advanced random forest model to rank water quality indicators, determines indicator weights using the rank centroid method, scores the indicators using a sub-index function designed for groundwater development, and compares the results of two commonly used aggregation functions to identify the optimal one. Based on the aggregated scores, the water quality at 137 monitoring sites is classified into five levels: “Excellent”, “Good”, “Medium”, “Poor”, or “Unacceptable”. Among the 11 water quality indicators (sodium, sulfate, chloride, bicarbonate, total dissolved solids, fluoride, boron, nitrate, pH, CODMn, and hardness), chloride was given the highest weight (0.236), followed by total dissolved solids (0.156), and sodium was given the lowest weight (0.008). The random forest model exhibits a good prediction capability before hyperparameter tuning (86% accuracy, RMSE of 0.378), and after grid search and five-fold cross-validation, the optimal hyperparameter combination is determined, further improving the performance of the random forest model (94% accuracy, F1-Score of 0.967, AUC of 0.91, RMSE of 0.232). For the newly developed groundwater sub-index function, interpolation is used to score each indicator, and after comparing two aggregation functions, the NSF aggregation function is selected as the most suitable for groundwater assessment. Overall, most of the groundwater in the study area was of poor quality (52.5% of low quality) and not suitable for drinking.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          A review of water quality index models and their use for assessing surface water quality

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Use of water quality indices to verify the impact of Córdoba City (Argentina) on Suquía River

            S Pesce (2000)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              A comprehensive method for improvement of water quality index (WQI) models for coastal water quality assessment

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                SUSTDE
                Sustainability
                Sustainability
                MDPI AG
                2071-1050
                October 2023
                October 04 2023
                : 15
                : 19
                : 14477
                Article
                10.3390/su151914477
                50342c0c-bae3-494d-8172-88de22be7bab
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article