A comparison study of DRASTIC methods with various objective methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment

被引:154
作者
Khosravi, Khabat [1 ]
Sartaj, Majid [2 ]
Tsai, Frank T-C [3 ]
Singh, Vijay P. [4 ,5 ]
Kazakis, Nerantzis [6 ]
Melesse, Assefa M. [7 ]
Prakash, Indra [8 ]
Bui, Dieu Tien [9 ]
Binh Thai Pham [10 ,11 ]
机构
[1] Sari Agr Sci & Nat Resources Univ, Fac Nat Resources, Sari, Iran
[2] Univ Ottawa, Civil Engn Dept, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
[3] Louisiana State Univ, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
[4] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Biol & Agr Engn, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[5] Texas A&M Univ, Zachry Dept Civil Engn, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[6] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Sch Geol, Thessaloniki, Greece
[7] Florida Int Univ, Dept Earth & Environm, AHC 5-390, Miami, FL USA
[8] Bhaskarchalya Inst Space Applicat & Geoinformat B, Dept Sci & Technol, Gandhinagar, India
[9] Univ South Eastern Norway, Dept Business & IT, Geog Informat Syst Grp, Gullbringvegen 36, N-3800 Bo I Telemark, Norway
[10] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Geog Informat Sci Res Grp, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
[11] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Fac Environm & Labour Safety, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
关键词
Groundwater vulnerability; DRASTIC; Weights-of-Evidence; Shannon Entropy; Logistic Model Tree; Bootstrap Aggregating; ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE APPROACH; FLOOD SUSCEPTIBILITY ASSESSMENT; BIVARIATE STATISTICAL-MODELS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; MULTICRITERIA DECISION; AQUIFER VULNERABILITY; SUPERVISED COMMITTEE; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION; FREQUENCY RATIO; RISK-ASSESSMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.130
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Groundwater vulnerability assessment is a measure of potential groundwater contamination for areas of interest. The main objective of this study is to modify original DRASTIC model using four objective methods, Weights-of-Evidence (WOE), Shannon Entropy (SE), Logistic Model Tree (LMT), and Bootstrap Aggregating (BA) to create a map of groundwater vulnerability for the Sari-Behshahr plain, Iran. The study also investigated impact of addition of eight additional factors (distance to fault, fault density, distance to river, river density, land-use, soil order, geological time scale, and altitude) to improve groundwater vulnerability assessment. A total of 109 nitrate concentration data points were used for modeling and validation purposes. The efficacy of the four methods was evaluated quantitatively using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve (AUC). AUC value for original DRASTIC model without any modification of weights and rates was 0.50. Modification of weights and rates resulted in better performance with AUC values of 0.64, 0.65, 0.75, and 0.81 for BA, SE, LMT, and WOE methods, respectively. This indicates that performance of WOE is the best in assessing groundwater vulnerability for DRASTIC model with 7 factors. The results also show more improvement in predictability of the WOE model by introducing 8 additional factors to the DRASTIC as ADC value increased to 0.91. The most effective contributing factor for ground water vulnerability in the study area is the net recharge. The least effective factors are the impact of vadose zone and hydraulic conductivity. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1032 / 1049
页数:18
相关论文
共 70 条
[1]   Aquifer vulnerability assessments using DRASTIC, Weights of Evidence and the Analytic Element Method [J].
Abbasi, Soroush ;
Mohammadi, Kourosh ;
Kholghi, Majid ;
Howard, Ken .
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL-JOURNAL DES SCIENCES HYDROLOGIQUES, 2013, 58 (01) :186-197
[2]   A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at Izmir, Turkey [J].
Akgun, Aykut .
LANDSLIDES, 2012, 9 (01) :93-106
[3]   The application of Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence for assessing groundwater vulnerability at Galal Badra basin, Wasit governorate, east of Iraq [J].
Al-Abadi A.M. .
Applied Water Science, 2017, 7 (4) :1725-1740
[4]  
Aller L., 1987, DRASTIC STANDARDIZED
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1987, EPA 600/2-87-035, DOI DOI 10.1029/2011WR010747
[6]  
Anwar M., 2002, P INT C, P18
[7]   Fuzzy vulnerability mapping of urban groundwater systems to nitrate contamination [J].
Asadi, Parisa ;
Hosseini, Seiyed Mossa ;
Ataie-Ashtiani, Behzad ;
Simmons, Craig T. .
ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2017, 96 :146-157
[8]   The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan [J].
Ayalew, L ;
Yamagishi, H .
GEOMORPHOLOGY, 2005, 65 (1-2) :15-31
[9]   A GIS-based DRASTIC model for assessing aquifer vulnerability in Kakamigahara Heights, Gifu Prefecture, central Japan [J].
Babiker, IS ;
Mohamed, MAA ;
Hiyama, T ;
Kato, K .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2005, 345 (1-3) :127-140
[10]   A novel hybrid intelligent model of support vector machines and the MultiBoost ensemble for landslide susceptibility modeling [J].
Binh Thai Pham ;
Jaafari, Abolfazl ;
Prakash, Indra ;
Dieu Tien Bui .
BULLETIN OF ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 78 (04) :2865-2886