4.6 Article

Modelling Bathing Water Quality Using Official Monitoring Data

Journal

WATER
Volume 13, Issue 21, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w13213005

Keywords

faecal indicator bacteria; E. coli; intestinal enterococci; bathing water quality prediction; predictive models; neural network; random forest

Funding

  1. Croatian Science Foundation [IP-2020-02-1880]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Predictive models of bathing water quality provide timely and adequate information for public health protection, requiring intensive sampling to collect sufficient data. In this study, a predictive model was developed in Kastela Bay using neural network for Escherichia coli and random forest for intestinal enterococci, achieving acceptable classification performance for the water samples.
Predictive models of bathing water quality are a useful support to traditional monitoring and provide timely and adequate information for the protection of public health. When developing models, it is critical to select an appropriate model type and appropriate metrics to reduce errors so that the predicted outcome is reliable. It is usually necessary to conduct intensive sampling to collect a sufficient amount of data. This paper presents the process of developing a predictive model in Kastela Bay (Adriatic Sea) using only data from regular (official) bathing water quality monitoring collected during five bathing seasons. The predictive modelling process, which included data preprocessing, model training, and model tuning, showed no silver bullet model and selected two model types that met the specified requirements: a neural network (ANN) for Escherichia coli and a random forest (RF) for intestinal enterococci. The different model types are probably the result of the different persistence of two indicator bacteria to the effects of marine environmental factors and consequently the different die-off rates. By combining these two models, the bathing water samples were classified with acceptable performances, an informedness of 71.7%, an F-score of 47.1%, and an overall accuracy of 80.6%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available