Using Expert Participation to Evaluate the Accuracy of Hand-Drawn Water-Table Maps.

Ground water Pub Date : 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1111/gwat.13431
Sarah Kathleen Marshall, Luk J M Peeters, Okke Batelaan, Saskia Noorduijn, Tanah Velterop
{"title":"Using Expert Participation to Evaluate the Accuracy of Hand-Drawn Water-Table Maps.","authors":"Sarah Kathleen Marshall, Luk J M Peeters, Okke Batelaan, Saskia Noorduijn, Tanah Velterop","doi":"10.1111/gwat.13431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Water-table maps are fundamental to hydrogeological studies and a manual, hand-drawn method is still commonly used to produce them. Despite this, the accuracy and variability of such maps have received little attention in international literature. In a unique experiment, 63 groundwater professionals drew water-table equipotential contours based on the same dataset of point measurements and were asked to infer flow directions and predict groundwater elevations at predefined locations. The root mean squared error (RMSE) for the average map calibration data was 10.5 m, which is accuracy comparable to numerical groundwater models. This study confirmed that to produce hand-drawn water-table maps, practitioners seek to not only fit the spatial data, but also to conform to their own cognitive model of hydrogeological concepts and processes. The calibration accuracy increased with experience; from a RMSE of 13.3 m for practitioners with 0-3 years of experience to a RMSE of 9.2 m for those with four or more years. Despite considerable variability in the style of the hand-drawn water-table maps, the maps were consistent in their representation of the dominant regional groundwater flow directions. There was less consensus, however, in predicting the direction of surface water-groundwater interaction for a stream reach. Hand-drawn water-table mapping remains useful and valid, especially as a starting point for hydrogeological conceptualization, yet further work is required to resolve issues around transparency, repeatability, and reproducibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":94022,"journal":{"name":"Ground water","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ground water","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.13431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Water-table maps are fundamental to hydrogeological studies and a manual, hand-drawn method is still commonly used to produce them. Despite this, the accuracy and variability of such maps have received little attention in international literature. In a unique experiment, 63 groundwater professionals drew water-table equipotential contours based on the same dataset of point measurements and were asked to infer flow directions and predict groundwater elevations at predefined locations. The root mean squared error (RMSE) for the average map calibration data was 10.5 m, which is accuracy comparable to numerical groundwater models. This study confirmed that to produce hand-drawn water-table maps, practitioners seek to not only fit the spatial data, but also to conform to their own cognitive model of hydrogeological concepts and processes. The calibration accuracy increased with experience; from a RMSE of 13.3 m for practitioners with 0-3 years of experience to a RMSE of 9.2 m for those with four or more years. Despite considerable variability in the style of the hand-drawn water-table maps, the maps were consistent in their representation of the dominant regional groundwater flow directions. There was less consensus, however, in predicting the direction of surface water-groundwater interaction for a stream reach. Hand-drawn water-table mapping remains useful and valid, especially as a starting point for hydrogeological conceptualization, yet further work is required to resolve issues around transparency, repeatability, and reproducibility.

利用专家参与评估手绘水表地图的准确性。
地下水位图是水文地质研究的基础,目前仍普遍采用手工绘制的方法制作地下水位图。尽管如此,此类地图的准确性和可变性却很少受到国际文献的关注。在一项独特的实验中,63 名地下水专业人员根据相同的点测量数据集绘制了水位等势线,并被要求推断水流方向和预测预定地点的地下水位。地图校准数据的平均均方根误差 (RMSE) 为 10.5 米,精度与数值地下水模型相当。这项研究证实,在绘制手绘水位图时,从业人员不仅要符合空间数据,还要符合自己对水文地质概念和过程的认知模型。校准精度随着经验的增加而提高;具有 0-3 年经验的从业人员的均方根误差为 13.3 米,而具有四年或四年以上经验的从业人员的均方根误差为 9.2 米。尽管手绘水位图的风格差异很大,但这些地图在表示区域地下水主要流向方面是一致的。不过,在预测溪流河段地表水与地下水相互作用的方向方面,共识较少。手绘水位图仍然有用且有效,尤其是作为水文地质概念化的起点,但需要进一步努力解决透明度、可重复性和可再现性方面的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信