Table 12 Details results of AHP and MIF techniques
Methods | Area under different groundwater potential zones (ha) (%) | ROC and AUC models | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poor | Moderate | Good | Very good | ||
MIF | 351.29 (34.1) | 511.18 (49.7) | 123.95 (12.0) | 41.78 (4.0) | 0.80 (good) |
AHP | 241.50 (23.5) | 285.64 (27.8) | 408.31 (39.7) | 92.75 (9.0) | 0.93 (excellent) |