Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A fuzzy logic-based approach for groundwater vulnerability assessment

  • Environmental Pollution led Vulnerability and Risk Assessment for Adaptation and Resilience of Socio-ecological Systems
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Groundwater vulnerability assessment systems have been developed to protect groundwater resources. The DRASTIC model calculates the vulnerability index of the aquifer based on seven effective parameters. The application of expert opinion in rating and weighting parameters is the DRASTIC model’s major weakness, which increases uncertainty. This study developed a Mamdani fuzzy logic (MFL) in combination with data mining to handle this uncertainty and predict the specific vulnerability. To highlight this approach, the susceptibility of the Qorveh-Dehgolan plain (QDP) and the Ardabil plain aquifers was investigated. The DRASTIC index was calculated between 63 and 160 for the Ardabil plain and between 39 and 146 for the QDP. Despite some similarities between vulnerability maps and nitrate concentration maps, the results of the DRASTIC model based on nitrate concentration cannot be verified according to Heidke skill score (HSS) and total accuracy (TA) criteria. Then the MFL was developed in two scenarios; the first included all seven parameters, whereas the second used only four parameters of the DRASTIC model. The results showed that, in the first scenario of the MFL modeling, TA and HSS values were respectively 0.75 and 0.51 for the Ardabil plain and 0.45 and 0.33 for the QDP. In addition, according to the TA and HSS values, the proposed model was more reliable and practical in groundwater vulnerability assessment than the traditional method, even using four input data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

We agree to share our data and materials.

References

  • Aller L, Bennett T, Lehr JH, Petty RJ, Hackett G (1985) DRASTIC: a standard system for evaluating ground water pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings. EPA/600/2-85/018, RS Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, Oklahoma

  • Almasri MN (2008) Assessment of intrinsic vulnerability to contamination for Gaza coastal aquifer, Palestine. J Environ Manag 88(4):577–593

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Antonakos AK, Lambrakis NJ (2007) Development and testing of three hybrid methods for the assessment of aquifer vulnerability to nitrates, based on the drastic model, an example from NE Korinthia, Greece. J Hydrol 333(2–4):288–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AsghariMoghaddam A, Kadkhodaie F, Barzegar R, Gharekhani M (2020) Comparison of neural network and neuro-fuzzy techniques to improve the DRASTIC Frame Work (Case Study: Shabestar plain Aquifer). Water Soil Sci 30(1):83–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Assefa TT (2022) Dataset for mapping groundwater contaminant risk using the DRASTIC model for a case study in Ethiopia. Data Brief 45:108565

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Babiker IS, Mohamed MA, Hiyama T, Kato K (2005) A GIS-based DRASTIC model for assessing aquifer vulnerability in Kakamigahara Heights, Gifu Prefecture, central Japan. Sci Total Environ 345(1–3):127–140

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Barzegar R, AsghariMoghaddam A, Nadiri A, Fijani E (2015) Using different fuzzy logic methods to optimize DRASTIC model, case study: Tabriz plain aquifer. Sci Q J Geosci 24(95):211–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdek JC (1981) Objective function clustering. Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 43–93

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bhuvaneswaran C, Ganesh A (2019) Spatial assessment of groundwater vulnerability using DRASTIC model with GIS in Uppar odai sub-watershed, Nandiyar, Cauvery Basin, Tamil Nadu. Groundw Sustain Dev 9:100270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordbar M, Neshat A, Javadi S, Shahdany SMH (2021) A hybrid approach based on statistical method and meta-heuristic optimization algorithm for coastal aquifer vulnerability assessment. Environ Model Assess 26(3):325–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordbar M, Neshat A, Javadi S, Pradhan B, Dixon B, Paryani S (2022) Improving the coastal aquifers’ vulnerability assessment using SCMAI ensemble of three machine learning approaches. Nat Hazards 110(3):1799–1820

  • Burrough PA, McDonnell RA, Lloyd CD (2015) Principles of geographical information systems. Oxford university press

  • Chakraborty B, Roy S, Bera A, Adhikary PP, Bera B, Sengupta D, Bhunia GS, Shit PK (2022) Groundwater vulnerability assessment using GIS-based DRASTIC model in the upper catchment of Dwarakeshwar river basin, West Bengal, India. Environ Earth Sci 81(1):1–15

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu SL (1994) Fuzzy model identification based on cluster estimation. J Intelli Fuzzy Syst 2(3):267–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cimino A, Cimino A, Oieni A (2021) Fuzzy logic implementation of vulnerability assessment in a coastal aquifer of Northern Sicily. J Geosci Environ Prot 9(8):177–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhanya CT, Kumar DN (2009) Data mining for evolving fuzzy association rules for predicting monsoon rainfall of India. J Intell Syst 18(3):193–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon B (2005) Applicability of neuro-fuzzy techniques in predicting ground-water vulnerability: a GIS-based sensitivity analysis. J Hydrol 309(1–4):17–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon W, Chiswell B (1992) The use of hydrochemical sections to identify recharge areas and saline intrusions in alluvial aquifers, southeast Queensland, Australia. J Hydrol 135(1–4):259–274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duhalde DJ, Arumí JL, Oyarzún RA, Rivera DA (2018) Fuzzy-based assessment of groundwater intrinsic vulnerability of a volcanic aquifer in the Chilean Andean Valley. Environ Monit Assess 190(7):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fijani E, Nadiri AA, Moghaddam AA, Tsai FTC, Dixon B (2013) Optimization of DRASTIC method by supervised committee machine artificial intelligence to assess groundwater vulnerability for Maragheh-Bonab plain aquifer, Iran. J Hydrol 503:89–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gharekhani M, Nadiri AA, AsghariMoghaddam A, Sadeghi Aghdam F (2015) Optimization of drastic model by support vector machine and artificial neural network for evaluating of intrinsic vulnerability of Ardabil Plain Aquifer. Iranian J Ecohydrol 2(3):311–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghasemi A, Talbot CJ (2006) A new tectonic scenario for the Sanandaj-Sirjan Zone (Iran). J Asian Earth Sci 26(6):683–693

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh R, Sutradhar S, Mondal P, Das N (2021) Application of DRASTIC model for assessing groundwater vulnerability: a study on Birbhum district, West Bengal, India. Model Earth Syst Environ 7(2):1225–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gogu RC, Dassargues A (2000) Current trends and future challenges in groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index methods. Environ Geol 39(6):549–559

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Estrada JC, de Pedro-Sanz E, López-Luque R, Pulido-Calvo I (2004) Comparison between traditional methods and artificial neural networks for ammonia concentration forecasting in an eel (Anguilla anguilla L.) intensive rearing system. Aquac Eng 31(3–4):183–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamamin DF, Nadiri AA (2018) Supervised committee fuzzy logic model to assess groundwater intrinsic vulnerability in multiple aquifer systems. Arab J Geosci 11(8):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han J, Kamber M, Pei J (2011) Data mining: concepts and techniques, 3rd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway RJ, Bezdek JC (1988) Recent convergence results for the fuzzy c-means clustering algorithms. J Classif 5(2):237–247

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hongxing L, Chen PCP, Huang HP (2001) Fuzzy neural intelligent system, mathematical foundation and the application in engineering. CRC LLC, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Huan H, Wang J, Teng Y (2012) Assessment and validation of groundwater vulnerability to nitrate based on a modified DRASTIC model: a case study in Jilin City of northeast China. Sci Total Environ 440:14–23

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Jayawardena AW, Perera EDP, Zhu B, Amarasekara JD, Vereivalu V (2014) A comparative study of fuzzy logic systems approach for river discharge prediction. J Hydrol 514:85–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake IR, Lovett AA, Hiscock KM, Betson M, Foley A, Sünnenberg G, Evers S, Fletcher S (2003) Evaluating factors influencing groundwater vulnerability to nitrate pollution: developing the potential of GIS. J Environ Manag 68(3):315–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen PM (1980) Industrial applications of fuzzy logic control. Int J Man Mach Stud 12(1):3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamdani EH (1976) Advances in the linguistic synthesis of fuzzy controllers. Int J Man Mach Stud 8(6):669–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamdani EH (1977) Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic synthesis. IEEE Trans Comput 26(12):1182–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehr AD, Nourani V, Hrnjica B, Molajou A (2017) A binary genetic programing model for teleconnection identification between global sea surface temperature and local maximum monthly rainfall events. J Hydrol 555:397–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mensah DO, Appiah-Adjei EK, Asante D (2023) Groundwater pollution vulnerability assessment in the Assin municipalities of Ghana using GIS-based DRASTIC and SINTACS methods. Model Earth Syst Environ 1–13

  • Moghaddam AA, Ilkhchi AK (2021) Assessing groundwater vulnerability potential using modified DRASTIC in Ajabshir Plain, NW of Iran

  • Moreira EE (2016) SPI drought class prediction using log-linear models applied to wet and dry seasons. Phys Chem Earth, Parts A/B/C 94:136–145

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1993) Groundwater vulnerability assessment: predicting relative contamination potential under conditions of uncertainty. Committee for assessing ground water vulnerability. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

  • Najafi H, Nourani V, Sharghi E, Roushangar K, Dąbrowska D (2022) Application of Z-numbers to teleconnection modeling between monthly precipitation and large scale sea surface temperature. Hydrol Res 53(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neshat A, Pradhan B, Pirasteh S, Shafri HZM (2014) Estimating groundwater vulnerability to pollution using a modified DRASTIC model in the Kerman agricultural area, Iran. Environ Earth Sci 71(7):3119–3131

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Najafi H, Sharghi E, Roushangar K (2021) Application of Z-numbers to monitor drought using large-scale oceanic-atmospheric parameters. J Hydrol 598:126198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novinpour EA, Moghimi H, Kaki M (2022) Aquifer vulnerability based on classical methods and GIS-based fuzzy optimization method (case study: Chahardoli plain in Kurdistan province, Iran). Arab J Geosci 15(4):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palanichamy J, Palani S, Hebsiba GA, Viola J, Tungsrimvong A, Babu B (2022) Simulation and prediction of groundwater quality of a semi-arid region using fuzzy inference system and neural network techniques. J Soft Comput Civ Eng 6(1):110–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Panagopoulos GP, Antonakos AK, Lambrakis NJ (2006) Optimization of the DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment via the use of simple statistical methods and GIS. Hydrogeol J 14(6):894–911

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Patel P, Mehta D, Sharma N (2022) A review on the application of the DRASTIC method in the assessment of groundwater vulnerability. Water Supply 22(5):5190–5205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Piscopo G (2001) Groundwater vulnerability map, explanatory notes – Castlereagh catchment. Centre for Natural Resources, NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation, New South Wales, Australia

  • Richman MB, Leslie LM (2014) Attribution and prediction of maximum temperature extremes in SE Australia. Procedia Comput Sci 36:612–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safari S, AsghariMoghaddam A, Nadiri A, Siahcheshm K (2016) Arsenic source and mechanism of its releases into groundwater resources of Chahardoli plain, Kurdistan province. Sci Q J Geosci 25(99):261–270. https://doi.org/10.22071/gsj.2016.40917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shakoor A, Khan ZM, Farid HU, Sultan M, Ahmad I, Ahmad N, Mahmood MH, Ali MU (2020) Delineation of regional groundwater vulnerability using DRASTIC model for agricultural application in Pakistan. Arab J Geosci 13(4):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharghi E, Paknezhad NJ, Najafi H (2021) Assessing the effect of emotional unit of emotional ANN (EANN) in estimation of the prediction intervals of suspended sediment load modeling. Earth Sci Inf 14(1):201–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shukla S, Mostaghimi S, Shanholt VO, Collins MC, Ross BB (2000) A county-level assessment of ground water contamination by pesticides. Groundw Monit Remediat 20(1):104–119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sokolova M, Lapalme G (2009) A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf Process Manag 45(4):427–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigter TY, Ribeiro L, Dill AMM (2006) Evaluation of an intrinsic and a specific vulnerability assessment method in comparison with groundwater salinisation and nitrate contamination levels in two agricultural regions in the south of Portugal. Hydrogeol J 14(1):79–99

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Stoecklin J (1968) Structural history and tectonics of Iran: a review. AAPG Bull 52(7):1229–1258

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugeno M (1985) An introductory survey of fuzzy control. Inf Sci 36(1–2):59–83

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Trach R, Trach Y, Kiersnowska A, Markiewicz A, Lendo-Siwicka M, Rusakov K (2022) A study of assessment and prediction of water quality index using fuzzy logic and ANN models. Sustainability 14(9):5656

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Villeneuve JP, Banton O, Lafrance P (1990) A probabilistic approach for the groundwater vulnerability to contamination by pesticides: the VULPEST model. Ecol Model 51(1–2):47–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vrba J, Zaporozec A (1994) Guidebook on mapping groundwater vulnerability. IAH International Contribution for Hydrogeology. Heise, Hannover 16(94):131

  • Wilks DS (2011) Statistical methods in the atmospheric sciences (Vol. 100). Academic press

  • Yu H, Wu Q, Zeng Y, Zheng L, Xu L, Liu S, Wang D (2022) Integrated variable weight model and improved DRASTIC model for groundwater vulnerability assessment in a shallow porous aquifer. J Hydrol 608:127538

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA, Klir GJ, Yuan B (1996) Fuzzy sets, fuzzy logic, and fuzzy systems: selected papers, vol 6. World scientific.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the research grant of the University of Tabriz (number 406).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Center of Excellence in Hydroinformatics, University of Tabriz, P.O. Box: 51666, Tabriz, Iran

    Vahid Nourani, Sana Maleki, Hessam Najafi & Aida Hosseini Baghanam

  2. Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Near East University, Near East Boulevard, 99138, via Mersin, Turkey

    Vahid Nourani

Authors
  1. Vahid Nourani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sana Maleki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hessam Najafi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aida Hosseini Baghanam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Vahid Nourani, Sana Maleki, Hessam Najafi, and Aida Hosseini Baghanam. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Sana Maleki, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hessam Najafi.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Marcus Schulz

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nourani, V., Maleki, S., Najafi, H. et al. A fuzzy logic-based approach for groundwater vulnerability assessment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 31, 18010–18029 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26236-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26236-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation