4.7 Article

Support vector machines in water quality management

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 703, 期 2, 页码 152-162

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2011.07.027

关键词

Support vector classification; Support vector regression; Kernel discriminant analysis; Kernel partial least squares; Water quality; Biochemical oxygen demand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Support vector classification (SVC) and regression (SVR) models were constructed and applied to the surface water quality data to optimize the monitoring program. The data set comprised of 1500 water samples representing 10 different sites monitored for 15 years. The objectives of the study were to classify the sampling sites (spatial) and months (temporal) to group the similar ones in terms of water quality with a view to reduce their number; and to develop a suitable SVR model for predicting the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of water using a set of variables. The spatial and temporal SVC models rendered grouping of 10 monitoring sites and 12 sampling months into the clusters of 3 each with misclassification rates of 12.39% and 17.61% in training, 17.70% and 26.38% in validation, and 14.86% and 31.41% in test sets, respectively. The SVR model predicted water BOD values in training, validation, and test sets with reasonably high correlation (0.952, 0.909, and 0.907) with the measured values, and low root mean squared errors of 1.53, 1.44, and 1.32, respectively. The values of the performance criteria parameters suggested for the adequacy of the constructed models and their good predictive capabilities. The SVC model achieved a data reduction of 92.5% for redesigning the future monitoring program and the SVR model provided a tool for the prediction of the water BOD using set of a few measurable variables. The performance of the nonlinear models (SVM, KDA, KPLS) was comparable and these performed relatively better than the corresponding linear methods (DA, PLS) of classification and regression modeling. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据