Machine learning algorithms for spatial data. Case studies: Environmental pollution, natural hazards, renewable resources

This paper presents general problems and approaches for the spatial data analysis using machine learning algorithms. Machine learning is a very powerful approach to adaptive data analysis, modelling and visualisation. The key feature of the machine learning algorithms is that they learn from empirical data and can be used in cases when the modelled environmental phenomena are hidden, nonlinear, noisy and highly variable in space and in time. Most of the machines learning algorithms are universal and adaptive modelling tools developed to solve basic problems of learning from data: classification/pattern recognition, regression/mapping and probability density modelling. In the present report some of the widely used machine learning algorithms, namely artificial neural networks (ANN) of different architectures and Support Vector Machines (SVM), are adapted to the problems of the analysis and modelling of geo-spatial data. Machine learning algorithms have an important advantage over traditional models of spatial statistics when problems are considered in a high dimensional geo-feature spaces, when the dimension of space exceeds 5. Such features are usually generated, for example, from digital elevation models, remote sensing images, etc. An important extension of models concerns considering of real space constrains like geomorphology, networks, and other natural structures. Recent developments in semi-supervised learning can improve modelling of environmental phenomena taking into account on geo-manifolds. An important part of the study deals with the analysis of relevant variables and models' inputs. This problem is approached by using different feature selection/feature extraction nonlinear tools. To demonstrate the application of machine learning algorithms several interesting case studies are considered: digital soil mapping using SVM, automatic mapping of soil and water system pollution using ANN; natural hazards risk analysis (avalanches, landslides), assessments of renewable resources (wind fields) with SVM and ANN models, etc. The dimensionality of spaces considered varies from 2 to more than 30. Figures 1, 2, 3 demonstrate some results of the studies and their outputs. Finally, the results of environmental mapping are discussed and compared with traditional models of geostatistics.

Evaluation of organ-specific peripheral doses after 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer based on Monte Carlo and convolution/superposition algorithms: implications for secondary cancer risk assessment.

To make a comprehensive evaluation of organ-specific out-of-field doses using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for different breast cancer irradiation techniques and to compare results with a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). Three breast radiotherapy techniques using 6MV tangential photon beams were compared: (a) 2DRT (open rectangular fields), (b) 3DCRT (conformal wedged fields), and (c) hybrid IMRT (open conformal+modulated fields). Over 35 organs were contoured in a whole-body CT scan and organ-specific dose distributions were determined with MC and the TPS. Large differences in out-of-field doses were observed between MC and TPS calculations, even for organs close to the target volume such as the heart, the lungs and the contralateral breast (up to 70% difference). MC simulations showed that a large fraction of the out-of-field dose comes from the out-of-field head scatter fluence (>40%) which is not adequately modeled by the TPS. Based on MC simulations, the 3DCRT technique using external wedges yielded significantly higher doses (up to a factor 4-5 in the pelvis) than the 2DRT and the hybrid IMRT techniques which yielded similar out-of-field doses. In sharp contrast to popular belief, the IMRT technique investigated here does not increase the out-of-field dose compared to conventional techniques and may offer the most optimal plan. The 3DCRT technique with external wedges yields the largest out-of-field doses. For accurate out-of-field dose assessment, a commercial TPS should not be used, even for organs near the target volume (contralateral breast, lungs, heart).