Cessation time approach incorporating parametric and non-parametric machine-learning algorithms for recovery test data

References

• Agarwal, R.G., 1980. A new method to account for producing time effects when drawdown type curves are used to analyze pressure buildup and other test data. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, 20. doi:10.2118/9289-MS.
   Google Scholar
• Apaydin, E., 2020. Introduction to machine learning. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ashjari, J., 2013. Determination of storage coefficients during pumping and recovery. Groundwater, 51 (1), 122–127. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2012.00917.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ballukraya, P.N. and Sharma, K.K., 1991. Estimation of storativity from recovery data. Groundwater, 29 (4), 495–498. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.1991.tb00540.x.
   Google Scholar
• Batu, V., 1998. Aquifer hydraulics: a comprehensive guide to hydrogeologic data analysis. New York, USA: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J.J., 1988. Pumping tests in nonuniform aquifers: the radially symmetric case. Journal of Hydrology, 101, 15–30. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(88)90025-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chenaf, D. and Chapuis, R.P., 2002. Methods to determine storativity of infinite confined aquifers from a recovery test. Groundwater, 40 (4), 385–389. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2002.tb02517.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cheng, L., et al., 2019. An additive Gaussian process regression model for interpretable non-parametric analysis of longitudinal data. Nature Communications, 10, 1798. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09785-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciftci, E., 2019. A new approach for analyzing drawdown data from a partially penetrating well. Water Resources Management, 33, 2727–2739. doi:10.1007/s11269-019-02246-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çiftci, E. and Sahin, A.U., 2023. Regression-based interpretation method for confined aquifer pumping tests. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 28 (2), 04022041. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çimen, M., 2015. A straight-line method for analyzing residual drawdowns at an observation well. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015 (1), 1–5. doi:10.1155/2015/978040.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, H.H. and Jacob, C.E., 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation constants and summarizing well-field history. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 27 (4), 526–534. doi:10.1029/TR027i004p00526.
   Google Scholar
• Dashti, Z., et al., 2023. A literature review on pumping test analysis (2000–2022). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 9184–9206. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-24440-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driscoll, F.G., 1986. Groundwater and wells. 2nd ed. St. Paul, MN: Johnson Division, 1089.
   Google Scholar
• Garamhegyi, T. et al., 2020. Revision of archive recovery tests using analytical and numerical methods on thermal water wells in sandstone and fractured carbonate aquifers in the vicinity of Budapest, Hungary. Environmental Earth Science, 79, 129. doi:10.1007/s12665-020-8835-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garin, T., et al., 2022. Improving hydrogeological understanding through well-test interpretation by diagnostic plot and modelling: a case study in an alluvial aquifer in France. Hydrogeology Journal, 30 (1), 283–302. doi:10.1007/s10040-021-02426-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goode, D.J., 1997. Composite recovery type curves in normalized time from Theis exact solution. Ground Water, 35, 672–678. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.1997.tb00133.x
   Google Scholar
• Gunawardhana, L.N., et al., 2021. Analytical and numerical analysis of constant-rate pumping test data considering aquifer boundary effect. Environmental Earth Sciences, 80, 543. doi:10.1007/s12665-021-09833-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, S., et al., 2022. Comparing the performance of machine learning algorithms using estimated accuracy. Measurement: Sensors, 24 (2022), 100432. doi:10.1016/j.measen.2022.100432.
   Google Scholar
• Gurarslan, G. and Karahan, H., 2015. Solving inverse problems of groundwater-pollution-source identification using a differential evolution algorithm. Hydrogeology Journal, 23 (6), 1109–1119. doi:10.1007/s10040-015-1256-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halford, K., et al., 2012. Advanced methods for modeling water-levels and estimating drawdowns with SeriesSEE, an Excel add-in. (Version 1.0: originally posted December 2012; Version 1.1: july 2016). Reston, VA: Techniques and Methods. doi:10.3133/tm4F4.
   Google Scholar
• Hantush, M.S., 1961. Drawdown around a partially penetrating well: proceedings of the American Society of civil engineers. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 87, 83–98. doi:10.1061/JYCEAJ.0000633
   Google Scholar
• James, G., et al., 2015. An introduction to statistical learning. New York: Springer, 315.
   Google Scholar
• Jekabsons, G., 2020. Toolboxes for Matlab/Octave. Available from: http://www.cs.rtu.lv/jekabsons/regression.html [Accessed April 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Kawecki, M.W., 1993. Recovery analysis from pumping tests with stepped discharge. Ground Water, 31 (4), 585–592. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.1993.tb00591.x.
   Google Scholar
• Kruseman, G.P. and de Ridder, N.A., 1990. Analysis and evaluation of pumping test data. 2nd ed. 47 vols. Wageningen, The Netherlands: International Institute for Land Reclamation and improvement.
   Google Scholar
• Lal, A. and Datta, B., 2018. Development and implementation of support vector machine regression surrogate models for predicting groundwater pumping-induced saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers. Water Resources Management, 32, 2405–2419. doi:10.1007/s11269-018-1936-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S., Lee, K.K., and Yoon, H., 2019. Using artificial neural network models for groundwater level forecasting and assessment of the relative impacts of influencing factors. Hydrogeology Journal, 27, 567–579. doi:10.1007/s10040-018-1866-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, P., Qian, H., and Wu, J., 2014. Comparison of three methods of hydrogeological parameter determination in leaky aquifers using transient flow pumping tests. Hydrological Processes, 28 (4), 2293–2301. doi:10.1002/hyp.9803.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishra, G.C. and Chachadi, A.G., 1985. Analysis of flow to a large diameter well during the recovery period. Ground Water, 23 (5), 646–651. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.1985.tb01513.x.
   Google Scholar
• Muneer, T. and Munawwar, S., 2006. Improved accuracy models for hourly diffuse solar radiation. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, 128, 104–117. doi:10.1115/1.2148972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naderi, M., 2019. Estimating confined aquifer parameters using a simple derivative-based method. Heliyon, 5 (10), e02657. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman, S.P., 1975. Analysis of pumping test data from anisotropic unconfined aquifers considering delayed gravity response. Water Resources Research, 11 (2), 329–342. doi:10.1029/WR011i002p00329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakzad, S.S., Roshan, N., and Ghalehnovi, M., 2023. Comparison of various machine learning algorithms used for compressive strength prediction of steel fiber‑reinforced concrete. Scientific Reports, 13, 3646. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-30606-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahin, A.U., 2016. A new inverse solution assessment for the recovery test using radial basis function collocation method. Water Resource Management, 30 (3), 947–962. doi:10.1007/s11269-015-1201-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahin, A.U., 2022. A novel optimisation framework for interpretation of unconfined aquifer pumping test data. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers – water management. doi:10.1680/jwama.21.00115.
   Google Scholar
• Sajehi-Hosseini, F., et al., 2018. A novel machine learning-based approach for the risk assessment of nitrate groundwater contamination. Science of the Total Environment, 644, 954–962. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuel, M.P. and Jha, M.K., 2003. Estimation of aquifer parameters from pumping test data by genetic algorithm optimization technique. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 129 (5), 348–359. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2003)129:5(348).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, W.F. and Zhang, H., 2003. Fundamentals of groundwater. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Seyoum, W.M., Kwon, D., and Milewski, A.M., 2019. Downscaling GRACE TWSA data into high-resolution groundwater level anomaly using machine learning-based models in a glacial aquifer system. Remote Sensing, 11 (7), 824. doi:10.3390/rs11070824.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi, X., et al., 2022. Application of the Gaussian process regression method based on a combined kernel function in engine performance prediction. ACS Omega, 7 (45), 41732–41743. doi:10.1021/acsomega.2c05952.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, S.K., 1999. Estimation of aquifer parameters from recovery data. In: V.P. Singh, I.W. Seo, and J.H. Sonu, eds. Proceedings of the international conference on water, environment, ecology, socioeconomics and health engineering; hydrologic modelling. Boca Raton: Water Resources Publications, LLC, 406–410.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, S.K., 2003. Storage coefficient and transmissivity from residual drawdowns. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 129 (8), 637–644. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2003)129:8(637).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theis, C.V., 1935. The relation between the lowering of the Piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 16 (2), 519–524. doi:10.1029/TR016i002p00519.
   Google Scholar
• Todd, D.K., 1980. Groundwater hydrology. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Trabucchi, M., Carrera, J., and Fernàndez‐Garcia, D., 2018. Generalizing Agarwal’s method for the interpretation of recovery tests under non‐ideal conditions. Water Resources Research, 54 (9), 6393–6407. doi:10.1029/2018WR022684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trinchero, P., et al., 2008. A new method for the interpretation of pumping tests in leaky aquifers. Groundwater, 46, 133–143. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00384.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Uddin, S., et al., 2019. Comparing different supervised machine learning algorithms for disease prediction. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 19, 281. doi:10.1186/s12911-019-1004-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), 1995. Ground water manual. U.S. Government Printing Office, Bureau of reclamation. 2nd ed. Washington, DC. https://www.usbr.gov/tsc/techreferences/mands/mands-pdfs/GndWater.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Willmann, M., et al., 2007. On the meaning of the transmissivity values obtained from recovery tests. Hydrogeology Journal, 15 (5), 833–842. doi:10.1007/s10040-006-0147-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, T.F. and Valocchi, A.J., 2015. Data-driven methods to improve baseflow prediction of a regional groundwater model. Computers & Geosciences, 85, 124–136. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2015.05.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, L. and Chapuis, R.P., 2019. Recovery test after a constant-head test in a monitoring well: interpretation methods and new findings. Engineering Geology, 259, 105150. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng, L., Guo, J.J., and Lei, Y., 2005. An improved straight-line fitting method for analyzing pumping test recovery data. Groundwater, 43 (6), 939–942. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2005.00094.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhuang, C., et al., 2020. A type-curve method for the analysis of pumping tests with piecewise-linear pumping rates. Groundwater, 58 (5), 788–798. doi:10.1111/gwat.12981.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zipper, S.C., et al., 2022. Quantifying streamflow depletion from groundwater pumping: a practical review of past and emerging approaches for water management. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 58, 289–312. doi:10.1111/1752-1688.12998
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar