A comparative assessment of modeling groundwater vulnerability using DRASTIC method from GIS and a novel classification method using machine learning classifiers

References

• Ahmad W, Choi M, Kim S, Kim D. 2019. Detection of land subsidence and its relationship with land cover types using ESA Sentinel satellite data: a case study of Quetta Valley, Pakistan. Int J Remote Sens. 40(24):9572–9603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aller L. 1985. DRASTIC: a standardized system for evaluating ground water pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings. Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory. Ada, Oklahoma: Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Baalousha HM. 2011. Mapping groundwater contamination risk using GIS and groundwater modelling. A case study from the Gaza Strip. Arab J Geosci. 4(3–4):483–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banadkooki FB, Ehteram M, Ahmed AN, Teo FY, Fai CM, Afan HA, Sapitang M, El-Shafie A. 2020. Enhancement of groundwater-level prediction using an integrated machine learning model optimized by whale algorithm. Nat Resour Res. 29(5):3233–3252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzegar R, Moghaddam AA, Adamowski J, Fijani E. 2017. Comparison of machine learning models for predicting fluoride contamination in groundwater. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. 31(10):2705–2718.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. 1996. Bagging predictors. Mach Learn. 24(2):123–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learn. 45(1):5–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone CJ, Olshen RA. 1984. Classification and regression trees. Belmont, CA, USA: Wadsworth International Group.
   Google Scholar
• Chen F-W, Liu C-W. 2012. Estimation of the spatial rainfall distribution using inverse distance weighting (IDW) in the middle of Taiwan. Paddy Water Environ. 10(3):209–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christopher AA, Alias Balamurugan SA. 2014. Prediction of warning level in aircraft accidents using classification techniques: an empirical study. In: Intelligent computing, networking, and informatics. New Delhi: Springer. p. 1217–1223.
   Google Scholar
• Cobbing J. 2020. Groundwater and the discourse of shortage in Sub-Saharan Africa. Hydrogeol J. 28(4):1143–1154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Díaz-Alcaide S, Martínez-Santos P. 2019. Mapping fecal pollution in rural groundwater supplies by means of artificial intelligence classifiers. J Hydrol. 577:124006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorsey-Spitz JS. 2015. Modeling nitrate contamination of groundwater in Mountain Home, Idaho using the drastic method (PhD Thesis). University Of Southern California.
   Google Scholar
• EAD. 2018. Groundwater wells inventory and soil salinity mapping for Abu Dhabi Emirate.
   Google Scholar
• Elmahdy S, Mohamed M. 2013. Influence of geological structures on groundwater accumulation and groundwater salinity in Northern UAE. Geocarto Int. 28(5):453–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmahdy SI, Mohamed MM. 2015. Groundwater of Abu Dhabi Emirate: a regional assessment by means of remote sensing and geographic information system. Arab J Geosci. 8(12):11279–11292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster SSD. 1987. Fundamental concepts in aquifer vulnerability, pollution risk and protection strategy.
   Google Scholar
• Ghazavi R, Ebrahimi Z. 2015. Assessing groundwater vulnerability to contamination in an arid environment using DRASTIC and GOD models. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 12:2909–2918.
   Google Scholar
• Gholap J. 2012. Performance tuning of J48 Algorithm for prediction of soil fertility. arXiv preprint arXiv:12083943.
   Google Scholar
• Huang X, Shi L, Suykens JA. 2014. Support vector machine classifier with pinball loss. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 36(5):984–997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchinson ML, Antono E, Gibbons BM, Paradiso S, Ling J, Meredig B. 2017. Overcoming data scarcity with transfer learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:171105099.
   Google Scholar
• Iqbal J, Nazzal Y, Howari F, Xavier C, Yousef A. 2018. Hydrochemical processes determining the groundwater quality for irrigation use in an arid environment: the case of Liwa Aquifer, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Groundwater Sustainable Dev. 7:212–219.
   Google Scholar
• Jesiya NP, Gopinath G. 2019. A customized FuzzyAHP-GIS based DRASTIC-L model for intrinsic groundwater vulnerability assessment of urban and peri urban phreatic aquifer clusters. Groundwater Sustainable Dev. 8:654–666.
   Google Scholar
• Kalantar B, Al-Najjar HA, Pradhan B, Saeidi V, Halin AA, Ueda N, Naghibi SA. 2019. Optimized conditioning factors using machine learning techniques for groundwater potential mapping. Water. 11(9):1909.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keerthi SS, Shevade SK, Bhattacharyya C, Murthy KRK. 2000. A fast iterative nearest point algorithm for support vector machine classifier design. IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 11(1):124–136.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Khan Q, Kalbus E, Alshamsi DM, Mohamed MM, Liaqat MU. 2019. Hydrochemical analysis of groundwater in Remah and Al Khatim regions, United Arab Emirates. Hydrology. 6(3):60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosravi K, Sartaj M, Tsai FT-C, Singh VP, Kazakis N, Melesse AM, Prakash I, Tien Bui D, Pham BT. 2018. A comsparison study of DRASTIC methods with various objective methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment. Sci Total Environ. 642:1032–1049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoll L, Breuer L, Bach M. 2019. Large scale prediction of groundwater nitrate concentrations from spatial data using machine learning. Sci Total Environ. 668:1317–1327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu Q, He Q, Shi Z. 2008. Extreme support vector machine classifier. In: Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. p. 222–233.
   Google Scholar
• Manjunatha MC, Ahmed A, Basavarajappa HT. 2020. Artificial recharge structures for groundwater augmentation in Mysuru Taluk of Karnataka State, India using Geospatial Technology. J Environ Sci Comput Sci Eng Technol. 9(4):652–674.
   Google Scholar
• Moghaddam DD, Rahmati O, Panahi M, Tiefenbacher J, Darabi H, Haghizadeh A, Haghighi AT, Nalivan OA, Bui DT. 2020. The effect of sample size on different machine learning models for groundwater potential mapping in mountain bedrock aquifers. Catena. 187:104421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed M, El-Shorbagy W, Kizhisseri MI, Chowdhury R, McDonald A. 2020a. Evaluation of policy scenarios for water resources planning and management in an arid region. J Hydrol RS. 32:100758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed M, Parimalarenganayaki S, Khan Q, Murad A. 2020b. Review on the use of environmental isotopes for groundwater recharge and evaporation studies in the gulf cooperation council countries. Groundw Sustain Dev. 12:100546.
   Google Scholar
• Mohamed MM, Al-Mualla AA. 2010a. Water demand forecasting in Umm Al-Quwain (UAE) using the IWR-MAIN specify forecasting model. Water Resour Manage. 24(14):4093–4120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed MM, Al-Mualla AA. 2010b. Water demand forecasting in Umm Al-Quwain using the constant rate model. Desalination. 259(1–3):161–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed M, Saleh N, Sherif M. 2010a. Modeling in-situ benzene bioremediation in the contaminated Liwa aquifer (UAE) using the slow-release oxygen source technique. Environ Earth Sci. 61(7):1385–1399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed M, Saleh N, Sherif M. 2010b. Sensitivity of natural attenuation to variations in kinetic and transport parameters. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 84(4):443–449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monserud RA, Leemans R. 1992. Comparing global vegetation maps with the Kappa statistic. Ecol Modell. 62(4):275–293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naghibi SA, Pourghasemi HR. 2015. A comparative assessment between three machine learning models and their performance comparison by bivariate and multivariate statistical methods in groundwater potential mapping. Water Resour Manage. 29(14):5217–5236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naghibi SA, Pourghasemi HR, Dixon B. 2016. GIS-based groundwater potential mapping using boosted regression tree, classification and regression tree, and random forest machine learning models in Iran. Environ Monit Assess. 188(1):44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nair MR, Ramya GR, Sivakumar PB. 2017. Usage and analysis of Twitter during 2015 Chennai flood towards disaster management. Procedia Comput Sci. 115:350–358.
   Google Scholar
• Oh H-J, Kim Y-S, Choi J-K, Park E, Lee S. 2011. GIS mapping of regional probabilistic groundwater potential in the area of Pohang City, Korea. J Hydrol. 399(3–4):158–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Othman AK. 2005. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of groundwater resources in Al-Khatim Area, UAE.
   Google Scholar
• Pal M. 2005. Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification. Int J Remote Sens. 26(1):217–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahmati O, Choubin B, Fathabadi A, Coulon F, Soltani E, Shahabi H, Mollaefar E, Tiefenbacher J, Cipullo S, Ahmad BB, et al. 2019. Predicting uncertainty of machine learning models for modelling nitrate pollution of groundwater using quantile regression and UNEEC methods. Sci Total Environ. 688:855–866.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro L. 2000. IS: Um novo índice de susceptibilidade de aquíferos à contaminação agrícola Internal report. ERSHA/CVRM, Instituto Superior Ténico Lisbon, Portugal, 12.
   Google Scholar
• Rizeei HM, Pradhan B, Saharkhiz MA, Lee S. 2019. Groundwater aquifer potential modeling using an ensemble multi-adoptive boosting logistic regression technique. J Hydrol. 579:124172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahoo S, Russo TA, Elliott J, Foster I. 2017. Machine learning algorithms for modeling groundwater level changes in agricultural regions of the US. Water Resour Res. 53(5):3878–3895.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sajedi-Hosseini F, Malekian A, Choubin B, Rahmati O, Cipullo S, Coulon F, Pradhan B. 2018. A novel machine learning-based approach for the risk assessment of nitrate groundwater contamination. Sci Total Environ. 644:954–962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Secunda S, Collin ML, Melloul AJ. 1998. Groundwater vulnerability assessment using a composite model combining DRASTIC with extensive agricultural land use in Israel’s Sharon region. J Environ Manage. 54(1):39–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Şener E, Şener Ş. 2015. Evaluation of groundwater vulnerability to pollution using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process method. Environ Earth Sci. 73(12):8405–8424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seyoum WM, Kwon D, Milewski AM. 2019. Downscaling GRACE TWSA data into high-resolution groundwater level anomaly using machine learning-based models in a glacial aquifer system. Remote Sens. 11(7):824.
   Google Scholar
• Sulova A, Jokar Arsanjani J. 2020. Exploratory analysis of driving force of wildfires in Australia: an application of machine learning within Google Earth engine. Remote Sens. 13(1):10.
   Google Scholar
• Vapnik V. 2000. The nature of statistical learning theory [Internet]. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; [accessed 2020 Dec 4]. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780387987804.
   Google Scholar
• Wang J, He J, Chen H. 2012. Assessment of groundwater contamination risk using hazard quantification, a modified DRASTIC model and groundwater value, Beijing Plain, China. Sci Total Environ. 432:216–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. 2011. Guidelines for drinking-water quality. 4th ed. [Internet]. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2011/dwq_guidelines/en/.
   Google Scholar
• Zaki MJ, Meira W, Jr, Meira W. 2014. Data mining and analysis: fundamental concepts and algorithms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zektser IS, Everett LG. 2004. Groundwater resources of the world and their use, IHP-VI Series on Groundwater. Paris: U. N. Educ. Sci. and Cultural Organ.
   Google Scholar