PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 8, 2025Water8 citationsOpen Access

Machine Learning Optimization of SWRO Membrane Performance in Wave-Powered Desalination for Sustainable Water Treatment

View Full Paper
LYLukka Thuyavan YogarathinamSASani I. AbbaJUJamilu Usman

Key Points

  • GPR achieved near-perfect predictive accuracy (~1.00) for permeate recovery and salt rejection, indicating its reliability.
  • MLP and SVM showed good performance but were affected by feature complexity, emphasizing the importance of input selection.
  • Sensitivity analyses identified feed pressure and brine salinity as critical positive factors affecting desalination outcomes.
  • DT models struggled with generalization and accuracy, suggesting careful model selection is essential for effective predictions.

Abstract

Wave-powered desalination systems integrate reverse osmosis (RO) with renewable ocean energy, providing a sustainable and environmentally responsible approach to freshwater production. This study aims to investigate wave-powered RO desalination using supervised and deep machine learning (ML) models to predict the effects of variable feed flow on permeate recovery and salt rejection under dynamic hydrodynamic conditions. Multiple ML models, including Gaussian process regression (GPR), support vector machines (SVMs), multi-layer perceptron (MLP), linear regression (LR), and decision trees (DTs) were systematically assessed for the prediction of permeate recovery and salt rejection (%) using three distinct input configurations: limited physicochemical features (M1), flow- and salinity-related parameters (M2), and a comprehensive variable set incorporating temperature (M3). GPR achieved near-perfect predictive accuracy R2 values (~1.00) with minimal errors for permeate recovery and salt rejection, attributed to its flexible kernel and probabilistic design. MLP and SVM also performed well, though they showed greater sensitivity to feature complexity. In contrast, DT models exhibited limited generalization and higher error rates, particularly when key features were excluded. Sensitivity analyses revealed that feed pressure (FP) and brine salinity (BS) were dominant positive influencers of permeate recovery and salt rejection. In contrast, brine flow (BF) and permeate salinity (PS) had negative impacts.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Yogarathinam et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e6a0f4718ef0a556b33ddfhttps://doi.org/10.3390/w17192896
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Prediction of Reverse Osmosis Membrane Fouling Using Machine Learning: MLR, ANN, and SVM at a Seawater Desalination Plant2026 · 4 citations
  2. 2Comparative Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Models for Predicting Water Quality in a Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plant2026
  3. 3A Multi-Model Ensemble for Advanced Prediction of Reverse Osmosis Performance in Full-Scale Zero-Liquid Discharge Systems2025 · 15 citations
  4. 4Modeling and evaluation of the permeate volume in membrane desalination processes using machine-learning techniques2024 · 14 citations
  5. 5Accelerating Water Desalination Screening of 2D Membranes via Machine Learning Surrogates2026