To facilitate the comparative water quality assessment results, Table 5 summarizes the assessment results for three methods. The calculated MAE, RMSE and R2 are 0.292, 0.371, 0.989 for BP-ANN model, and those of WNN are 0.073, 0.091 and 0.996, indicating that WNN model has a higher accuracy. Although the BP model has a good stability shown above, the evaluating result has a relatively large difference. According to the comparison of two neural network methods, the WNN method has a higher accuracy than the BP-ANN method. The BP method requires more iteration with no guarantee of accuracy of the results for the same task. It reveals that the WNN and NMR methods are both effective for water quality assessment because the result is consistent with the actual water quality status.
Water quality evaluation in the WNN, NMR and BP methods
Year . | Water quality grade . | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
#1 . | #2 . | #3 . | #4 . | #5 . | |||||||||||
WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | |
2004 | IV | IV | III | II | I | III | V | IV | III | I | V | V | II | III | III |
2005 | IV | IV | IV | II | I | II | IV | IV | III | II | III | IV | I | III | II |
2006 | IV | IV | V | I | I | IV | V | IV | V | III | IV | IV | I | I | II |
2007 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | IV | II | III | III | I | I | II |
2008 | IV | IV | III | I | I | III | V | IV | IV | IV | IV | V | I | II | IV |
2009 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | IV | IV | IV | V | I | I | III |
2010 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | III | II | II | II | II | II | IV |
2011 | IV | IV | V | II | I | III | V | IV | IV | II | II | II | III | IV | IV |
Year . | Water quality grade . | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
#1 . | #2 . | #3 . | #4 . | #5 . | |||||||||||
WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | WNN . | NMR . | BP . | |
2004 | IV | IV | III | II | I | III | V | IV | III | I | V | V | II | III | III |
2005 | IV | IV | IV | II | I | II | IV | IV | III | II | III | IV | I | III | II |
2006 | IV | IV | V | I | I | IV | V | IV | V | III | IV | IV | I | I | II |
2007 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | IV | II | III | III | I | I | II |
2008 | IV | IV | III | I | I | III | V | IV | IV | IV | IV | V | I | II | IV |
2009 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | IV | IV | IV | V | I | I | III |
2010 | IV | IV | III | I | I | II | V | IV | III | II | II | II | II | II | IV |
2011 | IV | IV | V | II | I | III | V | IV | IV | II | II | II | III | IV | IV |
NMR, The INPI method.