Implementing Machine Learning Algorithms for Water Quality Event Detection: Theory and Practice

  • Eyal BrillEmail author
Part of the Protecting Critical Infrastructure book series (PCIN, volume 2)


The current chapter examines the implementation of machine learning for water quality event detection. Two alternatives—supervised and unsupervised - are examined. It can be seen that the former performs better with the existence of historical classified true events, while the latter is preferable when history is not a factor. Water properties and their influence on methodology performance are also examined. The paper explains that TOC is preferred when false negative errors are rare or when experts' probability to make mistakes is low. The manuscript provides a numerical example that illustrates the two above-mentioned methodologies.


False Alarm Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve United States Environmental Protection Agency Unsupervised Learning Water Utility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Technical Terms and Abbreviations


American Water Works Associations


Decision tree


Event detection system


Logistic regression


Machine learning


Neural network


Environmental Protection Agency


Water quality event


Water quality event detection


  1. Berman O, Gavious A (2007) Location of terror response facilities: a game between state and terrorist. Eur J Oper Res 177(2007):1113–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall/CRC, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Chang N-B, Pongsanone NP, Ernest A (2012) A rule-based decision support system for sensor deployment in small drinking water networks. J Cleaner Prod 29–30:28–37Google Scholar
  4. Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Measur 20(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. EPA (2005) WaterSentinel online water quality monitoring as an indicator of drinking water contamination. EPA 817-D-05-002Google Scholar
  6. Helbling DE, VanBriesen JM (2008) Continuous monitoring of residual chlorine concentrations in response to controlled microbial intrusions in a laboratory-scale distribution system. Water Res 42(12):3162–3172Google Scholar
  7. Mann J, Runge J (2010) State of the industry report 2010: how water professionals are meeting ongoing challenges and economic uncertainty. J AWWA 102:10Google Scholar
  8. Quinlan JR (1986) Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn 1:81–106Google Scholar
  9. Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  10. Skadsen J (2008) Distribution system on-line monitoring for detecting contamination and water quality changes. J AWWA 100:7Google Scholar
  11. Story MS, Van der Gaag B, Burns B (2011) Advances in on-line drinking water quality monitoring and early warning systems. Water Res 45:741–747Google Scholar
  12. Yang YJ, Haught RC, Goodrich JA (2009) Real-time contaminant detection and classification in a drinking water pipe using conventional water quality sensors: techniques and experimental results. J Environ Manage 90(8):2494–2506Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Technology Management (MOT)Holon Institute of TechnologyHolonIsrael

Personalised recommendations