Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Performance of machine learning methods in predicting water quality index based on irregular data set: application on Illizi region (Algerian southeast)

Open access
Kouadri, Saber, Elbeltagi, Ahmed, Islam, Abu Reza Md. Towfiqul, Kateb, Samir·2021·Applied Water Science

Abstract

Groundwater quality appraisal is one of the most crucial tasks to ensure safe drinking water sources. Concurrently, a water quality index (WQI) requires some water quality parameters. Conventionally, WQI computation consumes time and is often found with various errors during subindex calculation. To this end, 8 artificial intelligence algorithms, e.g., multilinear regression (MLR), random forest (RF), M5P tree (M5P), random subspace (RSS), additive regression (AR), artificial neural network (ANN), support vector regression (SVR), and locally weighted linear regression (LWLR), were employed to generate WQI prediction in Illizi region, southeast Algeria. Using the best subset regression, 12 different input combinations were developed and the strategy of work was based on two scenarios. The first scenario aims to reduce the time consumption in WQI computation, where all parameters were used as inputs. The second scenario intends to show the water quality variation in the critical cases when the necessary analyses are unavailable, whereas all inputs were reduced based on sensitivity analysis. The models were appraised using several statistical metrics including correlation coefficient (R), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative absolute error (RAE), and root relative square error (RRSE). The results reveal that TDS and TH are the key drivers influencing WQI in the study area. The comparison of performance evaluation metric shows that the MLR model has the higher accuracy compared to other models in the first scenario in terms of 1, 1.4572*10–08, 2.1418*10–08, 1.2573*10–10%, and 3.1708*10–08% for R, MAE, RMSE, RAE, and RRSE, respectively. The second scenario was executed with less error rate by using the RF model with 0.9984, 1.9942, 3.2488, 4.693, and 5.9642 for R, MAE, RMSE, RAE, and RRSE, respectively. The outcomes of this paper would be of interest to water planners in terms of WQI for improving sustainable management plans of groundwater resources.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13201-021-01528-9

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Metadata

Authors
Kouadri, S., Elbeltagi, A., Islam, A. R. M. T., & Kateb, S.
Venue
Applied Water Science
Published
2021-11-06
Volume
11
Issue
12
ISSN
  • 2190-5487 (ISSN-L)
  • 2190-5495
OpenAlex
W3211647702
Cited by
283
References
64
FWCI
13.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Performance of machine learning methods in predicting water quality index based on irregular data set: application on Illizi region (Algerian southeast). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13201-021-01528-9
The paper
Kouadri, S., Elbeltagi, A., Islam, A. R. M. T., & Kateb, S. (2021). Performance of machine learning methods in predicting water quality index based on irregular data set: application on Illizi region (Algerian southeast). Applied Water Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-021-01528-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.