Enhancing groundwater vulnerability assessment through Bayesian inference

被引:0
|
作者
Taghavi, Nasrin [1 ]
Niven, Robert K. [1 ]
Kramer, Matthias [1 ]
Paull, David J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ New South Wales, Sch Engn & Technol, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
[2] Univ New South Wales, Sch Sci, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
关键词
Groundwater vulnerability assessment; Bayesian inference; Maximum a posteriori estimate; SINDy; Burdekin Basin; AQUIFER VULNERABILITY; IDENTIFICATION; STATISTICS; SYSTEMS; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.132781
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
This study introduces a Bayesian regularization framework for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability, which is applied to the Burdekin Basin, an agricultural catchment in Queensland, Australia. In this method, the Bayesian maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimate is used to estimate a linear model between major hydrological variables and nitrate concentrations - as a proxy for groundwater vulnerability - using the available nitrate data. This model is then applied to the entire Burdekin Basin within a Geographical Information System. Outputs include the model parameter coefficients and their uncertainties, and groundwater vulnerability maps for the catchment. To handle unknown parameters, two iterative Bayesian algorithms are used: the Bayesian joint maximum a posteriori (JMAP) estimate and the variational Bayesian approximation (VBA). These are compared to the index-based DRASTIC and DRASTICL methods widely used for groundwater vulnerability assessment, and a least squares regularization method with thresholding (SINDy algorithm). Compared to index-based methods, the Bayesian algorithms lead to higher Pearson correlation coefficients between measured and predicted nitrate concentrations (from 0.20 to 0.39 for 8 parameters), with a further improvement (0.60) using Fourier-filtered nitrate data. The inferred groundwater vulnerability maps were also quite different. This study demonstrates several advantages of the Bayesian framework, including the ranking of models, the calculation of model parameters and the quantification of their uncertainties.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] REGIONAL ASSESSMENT AND MAPPING OF GROUNDWATER VULNERABILITY TO CONTAMINATION
    ZEKTSER, IS
    BELOUSOVA, AP
    DUDOV, VY
    ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY, 1995, 25 (04): : 225 - 231
  • [32] Environmental tracers as a tool in groundwater vulnerability assessment
    Wachniew, Przemyslaw
    ACQUE SOTTERRANEE-ITALIAN JOURNAL OF GROUNDWATER, 2015, 4 (02): : 19 - 25
  • [33] A Mamdani Adaptive Neural Fuzzy Inference System for Improvement of Groundwater Vulnerability
    Agoubi, Belgacem
    Dabbaghi, Radhia
    Kharroubi, Adel
    GROUNDWATER, 2018, 56 (06) : 978 - 985
  • [34] Groundwater vulnerability assessment and mapping important current issues in groundwater protection
    Witkowski, A. J.
    ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY, 2007, 53 (03): : 477 - 478
  • [35] Network vulnerability assessment using Bayesian networks
    Liu, Y
    Man, H
    DATA MINING, INTRUSION DETECTION, INFORMATION ASSURANCE, AND DATA NETWORKS SECURITY 2005, 2005, 5812 : 61 - 71
  • [36] Simultaneous inference in risk assessment; A Bayesian perspective
    Held, L
    COMPSTAT 2004: PROCEEDINGS IN COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS, 2004, : 213 - 222
  • [37] Plan Assessment for Autonomous Manufacturing as Bayesian Inference
    Maier, Paul
    Jain, Dominik
    Waldherr, Stefan
    Sachenbacher, Martin
    KI 2010: ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2010, 6359 : 263 - 271
  • [38] SOFTWARE FAILURE PROBABILITY ASSESSMENT BY BAYESIAN INFERENCE
    Park, Gee-Yong
    Eom, Heung-Seop
    Jang, Seung Cheol
    Kang, Hyun Gook
    NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 183 (01) : 107 - 118
  • [39] Better Peer Grading through Bayesian Inference
    Zarkoob, Hedayat
    d'Eon, Greg
    Podina, Lena
    Leyton-Brown, Kevin
    THIRTY-SEVENTH AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, VOL 37 NO 5, 2023, : 6137 - 6144
  • [40] Approximating Bayesian Inference through Model Simulation
    Turner, Brandon M.
    Van Zandt, Trisha
    TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2018, 22 (09) : 826 - 840