BE final-year project · KLS Gogte Institute of Technology · 2021–22 · team of 5
Can nine lab measurements tell safe drinking water from unsafe? This page retrains her classifiers live on the 3,276-sample dataset and shows how they compare with simply guessing the majority class.
Every change re-runs the whole pipeline in your browser: split, impute, cap outliers, standardize, train three models and score them on held-out samples.
Selected model
All three models, same split
Enter lab readings (leave a box blank to treat it as missing). The selected model returns its prediction.
Computed from the current run. The dashed line is the majority-class baseline for this test split.
Train vs test accuracy
Correlation with potability (all 3,276 rows)
Decision tree: accuracy as the tree grows deeper
Her original notebook results (constants from the Colab notebook)
Held-out accuracy on a 30% test split of 983 samples, where predicting "not potable" for everything scores 61.1% (601 of 983). The random forest predicted no potable samples at all. Decision tree and random forest scored 100% on their own training data, a clear sign of overfitting.
First 10 rows as stored in water.csv. Blank cells are missing values. Potability: 1 = safe to drink, 0 = not safe.