| Literature DB >> 28335400 |
Pingjie Huang1, Yu Jin2, Dibo Hou3, Jie Yu4, Dezhan Tu5, Yitong Cao6, Guangxin Zhang7.
Abstract
Water quality early warning system is mainly used to detect deliberate or accidental water pollution events in water distribution systems. Identifying the types of pollutants is necessary after detecting the presence of pollutants to provide warning information about pollutant characteristics and emergency solutions. Thus, a real-time contaminant classification methodology, which uses the multi-classification support vector machine (SVM), is proposed in this study to obtain the probability for contaminants belonging to a category. The SVM-based model selected samples with indistinct feature, which were mostly low-concentration samples as the support vectors, thereby reducing the influence of the concentration of contaminants in the building process of a pattern library. The new sample points were classified into corresponding regions after constructing the classification boundaries with the support vector. Experimental results show that the multi-classification SVM-based approach is less affected by the concentration of contaminants when establishing a pattern library compared with the cosine distance classification method. Moreover, the proposed approach avoids making a single decision when classification features are unclear in the initial phase of injecting contaminants.Entities:
Keywords: contaminant classification; conventional water quality sensors; early warning systems; multi-classification probability output; support vector machine
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28335400 PMCID: PMC5375867 DOI: 10.3390/s17030581
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Flowchart of pollutants on-line classification.
Figure 2Flow-chart of the calculation process in selecting the parameters for the SVM model.
Figure 3Online water quality monitoring platform.
Figure 4Responses of sensors for potassium acid phthalate.
Classification results of cosine distance.
| Predict Class | Ammonium Citrate | Potassium Acid Phthalate | Potassium Ferricyanide | Copper Sulfate | Sodium Nitrite | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real Class | ||||||
| Ammonium citrate | 38 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0 | 29 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
| potassium ferricyanide | 1 | 0 | 29 | 8 | 0 | |
| copper sulfate | 3 | 4 | 1 | 19 | 12 | |
| sodium nitrite | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 31 | |
Classification results of MCPO.
| Predict Class | Ammonium Citrate | Potassium Acid Phthalate | Potassium Ferricyanide | Copper Sulfate | Sodium Nitrite | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real Class | ||||||
| Ammonium citrate | 37 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0 | 27 | 0 | 1 | 3 | |
| potassium ferricyanide | 0 | 1 | 34 | 3 | 0 | |
| copper sulfate | 0 | 2 | 0 | 32 | 5 | |
| sodium nitrite | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 34 | |
Accuracies of the four methods.
| Classification Method | Euclidean Distance | Mahalanobis Distance | Cosine Distance | MCPO | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test Pollutants | |||||
| Ammonium citrate | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.97 | 0.95 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0.77 | 0.45 | 0.93 | 0.88 | |
| Potassium ferricyanide | 0.73 | 0.65 | 0.76 | 0.90 | |
| Copper sulfate | 0.28 | 0.23 | 0.48 | 0.82 | |
| Sodium nitrite | 0.86 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.92 | |
| Average | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.80 | 0.90 | |
Classification results of cosine distance.
| Predict Class | Ammonium Citrate | Potassium Acid Phthalate | Potassium Ferricyanide | Copper Sulfate | Sodium Nitrite | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real Class | ||||||
| Ammonium citrate | 26 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0 | 22 | 0 | 4 | 3 | |
| potassium ferricyanide | 2 | 0 | 24 | 10 | 0 | |
| copper sulfate | 3 | 4 | 3 | 15 | 12 | |
| sodium nitrite | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 27 | |
Classification results of MCPO.
| Predict Class | Ammonium Citrate | Potassium Acid Phthalate | Potassium Ferricyanide | Copper Sulfate | Sodium Nitrite | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real Class | ||||||
| Ammonium citrate | 33 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0 | 25 | 0 | 1 | 3 | |
| potassium ferricyanide | 0 | 2 | 30 | 4 | 0 | |
| copper sulfate | 0 | 2 | 0 | 30 | 5 | |
| sodium nitrite | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 31 | |
Accuracies of the four methods.
| Classification Method | Euclidean Distance | Mahalanobis Distance | Cosine Distance | MCPO | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test Pollutants | |||||
| Ammonium citrate | 0.62 | 0.68 | 0.70 | 0.89 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 0.63 | 0.52 | 0.75 | 0.86 | |
| Potassium ferricyanide | 0.66 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.83 | |
| Copper sulfate | 0.25 | 0.21 | 0.40 | 0.81 | |
| Sodium nitrite | 0.82 | 0.72 | 0.75 | 0.89 | |
| Average | 0.60 | 0.55 | 0.65 | 0.86 | |
Support vector category table.
| Contaminant Category | Sample Number | Support Vector Number | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ammonium citrate | 1 mg/L | 47 | 38 |
| 2 mg/L | 40 | 10 | |
| 4 mg/L | 37 | 3 | |
| 8 mg/L | 50 | 6 | |
| Total | 174 | 57 | |
| Potassium acid phthalate | 1 mg/L | 39 | 29 |
| 2 mg/L | 37 | 29 | |
| 4 mg/L | 37 | 18 | |
| 8 mg/L | 37 | 6 | |
| Total | 150 | 82 | |
| Sodium nitrite | 1 mg/L | 38 | 29 |
| 2 mg/L | 38 | 14 | |
| 4 mg/L | 38 | 6 | |
| 8 mg/L | 37 | 3 | |
| Total | 154 | 52 | |
| Potassium ferricyanide | 1 mg/L | 37 | 35 |
| 2 mg/L | 38 | 23 | |
| 6 mg/L | 38 | 5 | |
| 8 mg/L | 21 | 7 | |
| Total | 134 | 70 | |
| Copper sulfate | 1 mg/L | 40 | 29 |
| 2 mg/L | 38 | 14 | |
| 6 mg/L | 38 | 6 | |
| 8 mg/L | 46 | 3 | |
| Total | 162 | 52 | |
| Total | 774 | 313 | |
Figure 5MCPO classification probability.
Contaminant classification probability from MCPO.
| Sample No. | Contaminant Classification Result | Real Contaminant | SVM Predicted Class | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | Type | |||
| 1 | 0.16 | 0.36 | 0.19 | 0.20 | 0.08 | IV | A | B |
| 2 | 0.98 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | I | A | A |
| 3 | 0.99 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | I | A | A |
| 4 | 0.44 | 0.21 | 0.07 | 0.22 | 0.06 | III | B | A |
| 5 | 0.00 | 0.95 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.05 | I | B | B |
| 6 | 0.15 | 0.25 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.17 | III | C | B |
| 7 | 0.42 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.31 | 0.09 | III | C | A |
| 8 | 0.04 | 0.49 | 0.30 | 0.05 | 0.12 | II | C | B |
| 9 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.87 | 0.03 | 0.02 | I | C | C |
| 10 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.23 | 0.29 | II | D | E |
| 11 | 0.51 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.30 | 0.06 | II | D | A |
| 12 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.69 | III | D | E |
| 13 | 0.27 | 0.07 | 0.23 | 0.26 | 0.18 | II | D | A |
| 14 | 0.15 | 0.11 | 0.46 | 0.24 | 0.05 | II | D | C |
| 15 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.93 | 0.01 | I | D | D |
| 16 | 0.00 | 0.70 | 0.01 | 0.27 | 0.02 | II | D | B |
| 17 | 0.03 | 0.63 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.25 | II | E | B |
| 18 | 0.43 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.24 | 0.15 | III | E | A |
| 19 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | I | E | E |
Note: A: ammonium citrate; B: potassium biphthalate; C: potassium ferricyanide; D: copper sulfate; E: sodium nitrite; I real type as the largest output probability; II real type as the second largest; III real type as the third largest; IV real type as the fourth largest, etc.
Statistical classification results.
| Type | Quantity | Pmax Average/% | σ Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | 167 | 0.9488 | 0.42 |
| II | 10 | 0.482 | 0.1767 |
| III | 6 | 0.4199 | 0.1398 |
| IV | 1 | 0.3648 | 0.1033 |
Figure 6Scatter diagram of the classification.