Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 580

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative analysis of surface water quality prediction performance and identification of key water parameters using different machine learning models based on big data

Chen, Kangyang, Chen, Hexia, Zhou, Chuanlong, Huang, Yichao, Qi, Xiangyang, Shen, Ruqin, Liu, Fengrui, Zuo, Min, Zou, Xinyi, Wang, Jinfeng, Zhang, Yan, Chen, Da, Chen, Xingguo, Deng, Yongfeng, Ren, Hongqiang·2020·Water Research

Abstract

The water quality prediction performance of machine learning models may be not only dependent on the models, but also dependent on the parameters in data set chosen for training the learning models. Moreover, the key water parameters should also be identified by the learning models, in order to further reduce prediction costs and improve prediction efficiency. Here we endeavored for the first time to compare the water quality prediction performance of 10 learning models (7 traditional and 3 ensemble models) using big data (33,612 observations) from the major rivers and lakes in China from 2012 to 2018, based on the precision, recall, F1-score, weighted F1-score, and explore the potential key water parameters for future model prediction. Our results showed that the bigger data could improve the performance of learning models in prediction of water quality. Compared to other 7 models, decision tree (DT), random forest (RF) and deep cascade forest (DCF) trained by data sets of pH, DO, CODMn, and NH3-N had significantly better performance in prediction of all 6 Levels of water quality recommended by Chinese government. Moreover, two key water parameter sets (DO, CODMn, and NH3-N; CODMn, and NH3-N) were identified and validated by DT, RF and DCF to be high specificities for perdition water quality. Therefore, DT, RF and DCF with selected key water parameters could be prioritized for future water quality monitoring and providing timely water quality warning.

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 · 10.1016/j.watres.2019.115454

Cites

34 of 34 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 34 references

Metadata

Authors
Chen, K., Chen, H., Zhou, C., Huang, Y., Qi, X., Shen, R., Liu, F., Zuo, M., Zou, X., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Chen, D., Chen, X., Deng, Y., & Ren, H.
Venue
Water Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
171
Pages
115454
ISSN
0043-1354 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2998681661
Cited by
580
References
34
FWCI
16.27
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: Comparative analysis of surface water quality prediction performance and identification of key water parameters using different machine learning models based on big data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115454
The paper
Chen, K., Chen, H., Zhou, C., Huang, Y., Qi, X., Shen, R., Liu, F., Zuo, M., Zou, X., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Chen, D., Chen, X., Deng, Y., & Ren, H. (2020). Comparative analysis of surface water quality prediction performance and identification of key water parameters using different machine learning models based on big data. Water Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115454

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.