volume 182 pages 104101

Hybrid computational intelligence models for groundwater potential mapping

Binh Thai Pham 1
Abolfazl Jaafari 2
Indra Prakash 3
Nguyen Cuong Quoc 5
Dieu Tien Bui 6
3
 
Department of Science and Technology, Bhaskaracharya Institute for Space Applications and Geo-Informatics (BISAG), Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, India
4
 
Data & Analytics Practice, Virtusa, NJ, USA
6
 
Geographic Information System Group, Department of Business and IT, University College of Southeast Norway, Bø i Telemark N-3800, Norway
Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2019-11-01
scimago Q1
wos Q1
SJR1.684
CiteScore11.1
Impact factor5.7
ISSN03418162, 18726887
Earth-Surface Processes
Abstract
Groundwater is the most important natural resource in many parts of the world that requires advanced new technologies for monitoring and control. This study presents a comparative analysis of three novel hybrid computational intelligence models that consist of a base Decision Stump classifier and three ensemble learning techniques, i.e., Rotation Forest, MultiBoost, and Bagging, for the groundwater potential mapping. Ten influencing factors (i.e., slope, aspect, plan curvature, topographic wetness index, rainfall, river density, lithology, land use, and soil) and 34 groundwater wells from the Vadodara district, Gujarat, India, were used to prepare a geospatial database. Using this database, three hybrid groundwater models, i.e., Rotation Forest based Decision Stump, MultiBoost based Decision Stump, and Bagging based Decision Stump, were developed. Based on a variety of performance metrics, it is revealed that the Rotation Forest based Decision Stump model had the best performance, followed by the MultiBoost based Decision Stump and Bagging based Decision Stump models. However, all the novel hybrid computational models presented here provided improved estimates of groundwater potential compared to those in previous studies and are sufficiently general to be used in many different landscapes around the world.
Found 
Found 

Top-30

Journals

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Geocarto International
9 publications, 7.14%
Water (Switzerland)
7 publications, 5.56%
Applied Sciences (Switzerland)
6 publications, 4.76%
Sustainability
5 publications, 3.97%
Remote Sensing
5 publications, 3.97%
Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
5 publications, 3.97%
Journal of Hydrology
4 publications, 3.17%
Water Resources Management
3 publications, 2.38%
Arabian Journal of Geosciences
3 publications, 2.38%
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment
3 publications, 2.38%
Advances in Space Research
3 publications, 2.38%
Geoscience Frontiers
3 publications, 2.38%
Groundwater for Sustainable Development
3 publications, 2.38%
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
2 publications, 1.59%
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
2 publications, 1.59%
Environmental Earth Sciences
2 publications, 1.59%
Earth Science Informatics
2 publications, 1.59%
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth
2 publications, 1.59%
Catena
2 publications, 1.59%
Ecological Informatics
2 publications, 1.59%
Environmental Modelling and Software
2 publications, 1.59%
Journal of Hydro-Environment Research
1 publication, 0.79%
Open Construction and Building Technology Journal
1 publication, 0.79%
Neural Computing and Applications
1 publication, 0.79%
Forests
1 publication, 0.79%
Symmetry
1 publication, 0.79%
Sensors
1 publication, 0.79%
Atmosphere
1 publication, 0.79%
Frontiers in Environmental Science
1 publication, 0.79%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Publishers

5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Elsevier
41 publications, 32.54%
Springer Nature
31 publications, 24.6%
MDPI
30 publications, 23.81%
Taylor & Francis
15 publications, 11.9%
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
3 publications, 2.38%
Wiley
2 publications, 1.59%
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
1 publication, 0.79%
Frontiers Media S.A.
1 publication, 0.79%
Emerald
1 publication, 0.79%
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
126
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Pham B. T. et al. Hybrid computational intelligence models for groundwater potential mapping // Catena. 2019. Vol. 182. p. 104101.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Pham B. T., Jaafari A., Prakash I., Singh S., Quoc N. C., Tien Bui D. Hybrid computational intelligence models for groundwater potential mapping // Catena. 2019. Vol. 182. p. 104101.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1016/j.catena.2019.104101
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104101
TI - Hybrid computational intelligence models for groundwater potential mapping
T2 - Catena
AU - Pham, Binh Thai
AU - Jaafari, Abolfazl
AU - Prakash, Indra
AU - Singh, Sushant
AU - Quoc, Nguyen Cuong
AU - Tien Bui, Dieu
PY - 2019
DA - 2019/11/01
PB - Elsevier
SP - 104101
VL - 182
SN - 0341-8162
SN - 1872-6887
ER -
BibTex
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2019_Pham,
author = {Binh Thai Pham and Abolfazl Jaafari and Indra Prakash and Sushant Singh and Nguyen Cuong Quoc and Dieu Tien Bui},
title = {Hybrid computational intelligence models for groundwater potential mapping},
journal = {Catena},
year = {2019},
volume = {182},
publisher = {Elsevier},
month = {nov},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104101},
pages = {104101},
doi = {10.1016/j.catena.2019.104101}
}
Profiles