The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Machine learning methods for better water quality prediction
Abstract
Abstract In any aquatic system analysis, the modelling water quality parameters are of considerable significance. The traditional modelling methodologies are dependent on datasets that involve large amount of unknown or unspecified input data and generally consist of time-consuming processes. The implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) leads to a flexible mathematical structure that has the capability to identify non-linear and complex relationships between input and output data. There has been a major degradation of the Johor River Basin because of several developmental and human activities. Therefore, setting up of a water quality prediction model for better water resource management is of critical importance and will serve as a powerful tool. The different modelling approaches that have been implemented include: Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), Radial Basis Function Neural Networks (RBF-ANN), and Multi-Layer Perceptron Neural Networks (MLP-ANN). However, data obtained from monitoring stations and experiments are possibly polluted by noise signals as a result of random and systematic errors. Due to the presence of noise in the data, it is relatively difficult to make an accurate prediction. Hence, a Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (WDT-ANFIS) based augmented wavelet de-noising technique has been recommended that depends on historical data of the water quality parameter. In the domain of interests, the water quality parameters primarily include ammoniacal nitrogen (AN), suspended solid (SS) and pH. In order to evaluate the impacts on the model, three evaluation techniques or assessment processes have been used. The first assessment process is dependent on the partitioning of the neural network connection weights that ascertains the significance of every input parameter in the network. On the other hand, the second and third assessment processes ascertain the most effectual input that has the potential to construct the models using a single and a combination of parameters, respectively. During these processes, two scenarios were introduced: Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. Scenario 1 constructs a prediction model for water quality parameters at every station, while Scenario 2 develops a prediction model on the basis of the value of the same parameter at the previous station (upstream). Both the scenarios are based on the value of the twelve input parameters. The field data from 2009 to 2010 was used to validate WDT-ANFIS. The WDT-ANFIS model exhibited a significant improvement in predicting accuracy for all the water quality parameters and outperformed all the recommended models. Also, the performance of Scenario 2 was observed to be more adequate than Scenario 1, with substantial improvement in the range of 0.5% to 5% for all the water quality parameters at all stations. On validating the recommended model, it was found that the model satisfactorily predicted all the water quality parameters (R2 values equal or bigger than 0.9).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Learning representations by back-propagating errors
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. (1986) · Nature · doi:10.1038/323533a0 · Cited by 31,892
Data mining: concepts and techniques
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-3305 · Cited by 28,531
River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles
Nash, J. E., & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 · Cited by 23,674
ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system
Jang, J.-S. R. (1993) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/21.256541 · Cited by 16,254
Structure identification of fuzzy model
Sugeno, M., & Kang, G. T. (1988) · Fuzzy Sets and Systems · doi:10.1016/0165-0114(88)90113-3 · Cited by 2,715
Artificial Neural Network Modeling of the Rainfall‐Runoff Process
Hsu, K., Gupta, H. V., & Sorooshian, S. (1995) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/95wr01955 · Cited by 1,515
Data Mining Concepts and Techniques Third Edition
Han, J., Kamber, M., & Pei, J. (2021) · Thammasat University Digital Collections · Cited by 1,180
Approximation and Radial-Basis-Function Networks
Park, J., & Sandberg, I. W. (1993) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1993.5.2.305 · Cited by 816
Artificial neural networks as rainfall-runoff models
MINNS, A. W., & HALL, M. J. (1996) · Hydrological Sciences Journal · doi:10.1080/02626669609491511 · Cited by 736
Application of neural networks to modelling nonlinear relationships in ecology
Lek, S., Delacoste, M., Baran, P., Dimopoulos, I., Lauga, J., & Aulagnier, S. (1996) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/0304-3800(95)00142-5 · Cited by 716
Cited by
A survey on river water quality modelling using artificial intelligence models: 2000–2020
Tiyasha, Tung, T. M., & Yaseen, Z. M. (2020) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124670 · Cited by 650
Tong, X., Mohapatra, S., Zhang, J., Tran, N. H., You, L., He, Y., & Gin, K. Y.-H. (2022) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2022.118418 · Cited by 367
Machine learning in natural and engineered water systems
Huang, R., Ma, C., Ma, J., Huangfu, X., & He, Q. (2021) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2021.117666 · Cited by 319
Prediction of Water Level and Water Quality Using a CNN-LSTM Combined Deep Learning Approach
Baek, S.-S., Pyo, J., & Chun, J. A. (2020) · Water · doi:10.3390/w12123399 · Cited by 281
Rizal, N. N. M., Hayder, G., & Yusof, K. A. (2022) · Water · doi:10.3390/w14081221 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Najah Ahmed, A., Binti Othman, F., Abdulmohsin Afan, H., Khaleel Ibrahim, R., Ming Fai, C., Shabbir Hossain, M., Ehteram, M., & Elshafie, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Hydrology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 578
- Pages
- 124084
- ISSN
- 0022-1694 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2970835038
- Cited by
- 686
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 20.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Machine learning methods for better water quality prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124084
- The paper
- Najah Ahmed, A., Binti Othman, F., Abdulmohsin Afan, H., Khaleel Ibrahim, R., Ming Fai, C., Shabbir Hossain, M., Ehteram, M., & Elshafie, A. (2019). Machine learning methods for better water quality prediction. Journal of Hydrology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124084
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.