Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eiar

Artificial intelligence based e-waste management for

environmental planning
Jie Chen a, Shoujun Huang b, *, S. BalaMurugan c, G.S. Tamizharasi d
a
School of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing 400065, China
b
School of Public Affairs, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
c
Intelligent Research Consultancy Services (iRCS), Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, 641014, India
d
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT), Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632014, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Electronic waste is one of the world’s rapidly increasing environmental issues because a wide range of toxic
E-waste substances are not closely monitored that can pollute the atmosphere and affect health. This paper proposes an
Artificial intelligence Artificial Intelligence Technique (AIT) for the analysis of hazardous pollutants in e-waste and their effects on the
Environmental planning
climate and human health and management policies in certain countries. Artificial Intelligence Techniques (AIT)
are being developed for managing e-waste, especially based on prevailing strategies such as Life Cycle Assess­
ment (LCA), Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA), and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). In the e-waste man­
agement sector, eco-design systems must be created, e-waste properly processed, recycled, and reused content
through safe methods, e-waste disposed of using appropriate techniques, used electronic devices cannot be
transferred to developing countries, and the burden of e-waste should be increased. Artificial intelligence-based
MCA and EPR is a reasonable approach to address the increasing problems with e-wastes.

1. Introduction to e-waste management models
Before the opening of the standardized and prevailing paradigm of
electronic waste treatment, such as by funded networks and different
forms of private groups, wastes have primarily focused on small social
circles (Abbasi and El Hanandeh, 2016). Supervision and management
are a distinctive work source of these principal social groups. Particu­
larly, e-waste has to take more care in the present world and provide
much care with financial support. Material flow theory states, in most
countries before the reuse, the trend of material flow occurred (Menouer
et al., 2020a).
The segregation of different waste has raised problems for this con­
ventional treatment structure over the past few years. The reality is that
few sources are available to facilitate the process if appropriate, while
the percentage of e-waste treatment is increasing (Król et al., 2016).
Such procedures are known as Life Cycle Assessment and Multi-Criteria
Analysis as well as Extended Producer Responsibility. Several types of
research by different researchers revealed that about 63% of general
wastes comprise of e-waste. The longer the period as e-waste untreated
technically, and the proportion of the toxic substances and pollutants
begins to increase rapidly in the atmosphere (Shyam et al., 2017; Abdel-
Basset et al., 2019; de Souza Melaré et al., 2017).
Waste treatment and management are related to significant social
implications and can have adverse effects on the development of rich
environmental culture and environmental wellbeing (Kadry, 2013).
Some studies have found that waste treatment is especially susceptible
to various drawbacks and that they challenge in contrast with goodness.
Life with toxic pollutants has a determinantal impact on the wellbeing of
the people (Sudha et al., 2016; Menouer et al., 2020b). Cross-
disciplinary research in rural areas has found that e-waste is more
likely toxic than different waste processing to experience consequences.
Increasing the aspects of e-waste in the health, social, and cultural do­
mains have already pushed the country’s economic background. The e-
waste treatment process of a country includes seeking a way to boost the
safety of a nation (Qi et al., 2018; Elhoseny et al., 2017).
Previous research indicated that the maintenance of health status is
one of the main factors for safety commitment and disease prevention.
The LCA utilizes the unique principle of assessments to claim that such
health is correlated with the reasonable, freedom of a person’s material
consumptions and social actions made possible under the constraints of
a nation protocol (Sarc et al., 2019). For society, hazardous e-waste
affects health habits like mediwaste. Sometimes it may happen in

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: huangshj29@mail.sysu.edu.cn (S. Huang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106498
Received 9 August 2020; Received in revised form 15 September 2020; Accepted 13 October 2020
Available online 23 November 2020
0195-9255/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
J. Chen et al.
combination with risky social activities such as disposal of electronic
equipment linked to waste disposal. Hence the physical wellbeing of
people is very significant in their general health. A WHO research
showed that almost improper e-waste pollutants are linked to 21% of
environmental causes, 13% to hereditary reasons, and 28% to the health
issues (Makkar and Kumar, 2018; Nabavi-Pelesaraei et al., 2017;
Ahamed et al., 2016). This has been shown that toxic e-waste is related
to increased air pollution, atmospheric toxicants in which results in
diseases such as Metabolic inability Some research revealed strong as­
sociations between the social networks of waste management and e-
waste segregation, as well as the norms of the living standards (Ripa
et al., 2017; Turner et al., 2016).
The AIT has been suggested because of technology deficiency that
involves waste-management, joint supervision, and the collection
management process for the advancement of the management process
with safety. The management focus includes waste collection and e-
waste segregations, and the approach may be used with Artificial In­
telligence (AI). Fig. 1 demonstrates the framework focused on general
waste management principles and strategies for management.
The AIT model explicitly split the entire segregation process into
three phases, separating the modules and dividing them into usage
groups and processing for reuse. Within the multiple methods and
classes, specific prevention approaches are concerned, along with the
process. It is believed that AIT may successfully change the practice of e-
waste management. A successful model for analyzing e-waste is imple­
ment using the AIT and performed a criteria-based study to measure the
effect of the AIT model on the segregation process. By enhancing the safe
environment of waste management, the findings would allow for inno­
vative prevention approaches to improve the lives and safety of people.
This study introduces and minimizes the evaluated technology by
introducing AIT. The improved advantage of these methods is the sys­
tematic mechanism for taking out the impossibility and weakly
contributing sections, the toughness of the measurement, and speeding
up the evaluation. AIT is a valuable method to tackle the systems. Be­
sides, the reduction process can be adjusted according to time conditions
using iterative models according to the appropriate error point. This
method is used to construct a model that can predict status scenarios at
any moment. AIT is used independently as isolated structures in
different subsystems at different stages. Hence, separate error limits may
be set for each function to be minimized separately. The article is
structured as follows. Section 2 explains the underlying waste man­
agement model. The problem reduction strategies for e-waste dependent
on AIT are elaborated in Section 3. The AIT model, a summary of the
research setting, and test data and interpretation of the findings are
Fig. 1. Waste management framework.
2
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498
described in Section 4. The conclusions are eventually established in
Section 5 with future perspectives.
2. Background of the prevailed models for waste management
A study found that health promotion programs aimed at sustaining
and growing environmental factors, pollutants reduction and safety
development would boost the quality of life of people with the health
management program, the author of (Angelo et al., 2017) completed a
simple method called WST and showed the beneficial results relative to a
managed process called waste Segregation Treatment.
The author (Sharma and Chandel, 2017) confirmed that the WRRI,
which provides entire waste processing, shown an impressive efficacy.
And other model promotion schemes, which address the medical, bio­
logical, and reliable waste processing. The findings from the multi-
domain segregation risk screening to control indicate that a multi-
domain regimen can enhance or maintain cognitive performance in
the general population.
In (Brancoli et al., 2017), It is noted that a recycle-oriented waste
therapy technique (RWTT) has positive outcomes across a wide variety
of group environments for ethnically diverse criteria. Research in (Ripa
et al., 2017) indicated that selective enhancement of the quality of
wellbeing of the situation. Nevertheless, in prior intervention trials, a
single intervention approach was implemented; thus, multiple proced­
ures were not segregated or performed at varying stages in the inter­
vention process.
The authors of (Bovea and Powell, 2016) promoted a WSL, and that
may be a help for successful processing against pollutants. Social assis­
tance (SA) may improve their WSL. This research investigated the
moderating impact in three modules on WSL. The socio-economic status
compensatory position in the absence of segregation has been
considered.
The authors in (McAuliffe et al., 2016) investigated the quality
Purpose of waste (QPW) and are aimed at generating greater social
awareness about QPW. The relationship is tested using the association
co-efficient, the logistic regression model, organized waste regression
and waste retraction multinomial, and the Structural Equation Model
(SEM).
In (Mastrucci et al., 2017), It has been begun with Internet infra­
structure and urban home care systems and introduced new-generation
IT technology such as the Cloud, the social Cloud, the Internet of Things,
digital data, and cloud computing to the concept of waste care facilities
that enable everyone to understand. The capabilities of such programs
are entirely incorporated, allowing the related data to be exchanged
J. Chen et al.
with multiple providers of facilities in real-time and encouraging the
creation of a different category of the model for online environment care
society.
The writers in (Bisinella et al., 2016) Examined the AI-based waste
Management Process (AI-WMP). It is a Study of waste regression. It was
used to research safety predictors. To order to determine the factor of the
ability to waste treatment, a longitudinal regression model was applied.
The authors of (Ding et al., 2016) enrolled central Chinese towns and
villages via the stratified process of Random Waste Sampling (RWS). The
RWS measured and evaluated the risk factors of all categories, was
performed. The inability to have continuous segregation became a risk
factor in such modeling.
In (Rigamonti et al., 2016), it is Clarified the real condition of the
lifestyles and quality of life of the small city in North-Eastern China. The
demographic factors (DF) were used to calculate environmental factors
as well as the health promotion of lifestyles. Study results, one-sided
variance analysis, association analyzes, and numerous linear regres­
sion tests were used to evaluate the results (Salomone et al., 2017).
3. Artificial intelligence based on e-waste management for
environmental planning
The simple AIT model has a multi-level hierarchical cluster-structure
that simplifies the concept expansion and the method of evaluation. The
input parameter classification is based on the conceptual connections
between them. Three principal groups were developed, which indicate
whether they belong to the medical waste, characterize the e-waste, or
define toxic atmosphere pollutants.
The upcoming grouping will be carried out among the major cate­
gories depending on the permanence of factors like modifying criteria
such as real-time indicator conditions such as the daily waste and strain.
As seen in the Fig. 2, the framework is centered on the pattern. In the left
line, the perceived contributing factors of waste segregation rate
measured. In the middle of the diagram, three blocks indicate that the
parameter belongs to the category of risk factor. On the right-hand side,
it will consider the rising degree of hierarchy. The real danger level for
Fig. 2. AIT model basic structure.
3
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498
the e-waste is determined depending on the artificial intelligence clas­
ses. The core AI systems make up the model’s subsystems. Throughout
the collection, their relation to the total risk amount is measured sepa­
rately for the toxic pollutants and climatic changes. The subsystems, like
various parameters, are evaluated in real-time, while the remainder of
the model is tested offline.
The physical status of the e-waste is defined by the material category,
which is the most significant and dynamic unit because, in this c-mod­
ule, the specific circumstances decide mostly the load efficiency of the
waste collected and most correlations with the input variables can be
identified. Inabilities, including infectious illnesses, are the first
contributing variables into this module. These toxic pollutants are quasi-
permanent, although the seriousness of diseases can differ periodically.
The second input is the current physical state subsystem, which supplies
real status information about the process. The parameters calculated by
the AIT are climatic change, pollutants, toxins. Input parameters often
are used to establish unique participation roles using related measures
and variables that affect them. It defines the membership function
tuning and reuse. In real-time, controlling these values guarantees
constant supervision, and thus, from the real-time point of view, this is
the most critical component. The input module is used to define the
essential features, and the living conditions are the specific physical
facts. In this section, metal segregation is particularly significant.
Although it has a smaller impact than others, it can raise the cause.
The second level module is used to describe toxic patterns. The sub-
factors indicate how extreme, how long an individual is an effect on
average, and how it causes to severe.
Finally, the third module component utilizes integrated environ­
mental usage subfactors. Owing to its effect on experience is coupled
with real and severe. This community is more significant; together, it
may affect the probability of implementation at home.
AIT estimation measures the danger levels of subsystems at all hi­
erarchical stages. The present state, the situation, and the entire risk
assessment subsystems are those aspects of the process that take part in
an examination in real-time. The rules were formed with trainer input.
The evaluation is based on the MCA and EPR framework.
J. Chen et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

3.1. MCA and EPR method implementation matrices generated as a consequence of the decline will be modified to
satisfy the requirements of absolute normalization and nonnegative. The
For minimizing uncertainty in classical and numerical frameworks, current membership functions can then be defined from these trans­
the AIT, along with MCA and EPR methods, are used. The decrease may formed matrices, thus ensuring that they will be fluid membership
be useful if the process just filters the redundancy of the device or not if functions and, in the partition,
less contributing components are still handled. Based on the climatic The MCA is intended to convert the reduced matrices Y and X, ob­
condition, the degree of minimization will be calculated according to the tained, into matrices Y and X as a whole a in which the number of ele­
highest appropriate error. ments in each row shall be 1 as in Eq. (7),
The AIT algorithm is focused on the decomposition of any real-
X1 ⎧ (7)
valued matrix E which can be represented for the assumption of e- ⎪ [ ][ ]
waste as in Eq. (1) ⎨ X d Xa sum ( X d )T
⎪ 0 1
if a = 0
a a 0 0
a=
⎪ ( d )T ( d )T
E(a1 ×a2 ) = X(a1 ×a1 ) Y(a1 ×a2 ) Z T (a2 ×a2 ) (1) ⎪
⎩ sum Xa Xa if a = 1

where, X(a)(a = 1, 2, …n) is a diagonal matrix of the integrating values ωi Well known emnAIT = max (em) is too determined.
of E, i.e.XaXTa = E, and Y is a decreasing diagonal matrice. Such values The Nonnegative attempts to transform the matrices Xaand Ya, to
indicate the significance of the columns in X(a), i.e., the stronger the retain the nonnegative property to an increasing dimension of Xa. Since
segregation value, the more relevant it is. nAIT = min (a1, a2) is the the MCA property persists in the Nonnegative transition, the elements
cumulative number of nonzero integration values, which results in the are guaranteed in intervals [0, 1]. Let,
third level hierarchy. The arrays may be split into two sections during ⎧
the reduction, referencing the rest, and Zrefers to the discarded collec­ ⎨ 1 if xa,min>1
⎪
tions, respectively. It still keeps nAIT as in Eqs. (2) and (3) ϑa= 1 (8)
⎪
⎩ if xa,min<1
⃒ ⃒ a, min
X(a) = ⃒X(a) h X(a) k ⃒ (2)
⃒ ⃒ where, a, min is a minimized part therefore Xacan be described as in Eq.
⃒Y h 0 ⃒⃒
Y(a) = ⃒⃒ (a) k ⃒ (3) (9)
0 Y(a) ⎡ ⎤
1 + ϑa ⋯ 1
When Y(a)includes zero distinct values, then E = XhYhXTh . For other ′ 1
Xa = X a ⎣ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ⎦ (9)
instances, Ejust can be approximated as E1 = XhYhXTh . In other situations. ϑa
1 ⋯ 1 + ϑa
An additional significant consideration is the approximation bias of the
reduced matrix since the effects following the reduction fulfill those where, Xa Is the column number. Similarly, at the end of the MCA
⎧
accuracy criteria. An error matrix can be calculated by Eqs. (4) and (5) to ⎪ 1 if xa,min>1
⎨
the error of the AIT -based model. transformation, Y is derived from Equation ϑa= .
1
⎪
⎩ if xa,min<1
∑
nAIt xa , min
em = |E − E1 | = ωa x1.xnT (4)
a=0

emnAIT = max(em) (5) 3.2. LSA AND MCA criterion analysis model

For some instances, the LCA approach needs to be expanded to
accommodate broader matrices. This extended form is called AIT and
can be reduced in n measures in this situation. One dimension of matrix
E is cut in each step, which contains the consequences. Every subsequent
Ei is then created by phase i − 1 in the initial matrix of E1 = E. The al­
gorithm at step i > 1 is:
Step1: The length of the n-dimensional matrix E is
a × an × ai− 1 × ai × ………………. . × ai>1
and again, it can segment into a matrix D of 2 dimensions and the length can be as
ai × a * an * ai− 1 * ai * ………………. . * ai>1.
Step 2: D is minimized in a way that
D = XiYXTi = XiD*,
whereas the length of X is
ai × ai>1 and the length of the D* is
ai × a * an * ai− 1 * ai * ………………. . * ai>1.
Step 3: D* is reanalyzed into a matrix of n-dimension as Ep+1 and it too maintains in
the same length of
ai × a * an * ai− 1 * ai * ………………. . * ai>1.*nn
Step 4: The algorithm repeated from level 1 to step 4 of Ep+1
When the process is finished, Ep+1 includes the findings and current
membership responsibilities are the product of the decreased rules as in
Eq. (6)
∑
ωXa,i (Xa) = ωXa,i (Xa), ωXa,i (6)
q subsystems are the category for medical problems, which is supplied by
An essential prerequisite in MCA is for the following conditions: ωi∀a)
to (Abbasi and El Hanandeh, 2016). This criterion cannot be fulfilled by
the current membership functions extracted from (6). That is why the
In the tracking system seen in Fig. 3, the AIT configuration is
implemented. The measurements for real-time are the EPR measurement
of e-waste management. The levels are measured every second and
transmitted to the EPR evaluation device through the protocol. Similar
to the stresses on the toxicants, third module testing should be carried
out at more prolonged periods. It takes several minutes of analysis and is
transmitted to the device through the process strategy. The resultant
gain due to the third module of the process, has been shown well. The
values obtained are analyzed continuously. If metric values shift unex­
pectedly, the method switches to the reduced model, and this reduced
model is measured, while the whole law base is usually used.
The suggested AIT simple model is capable of dealing with rapidly
shifting situations that could require an insufficient resource and
response time. Additionally, it may respond to the normal incomplete or
even lacking usable data as they should be managed while the program
is operating in some moment mode, i.e., when an acceptable portion of
the real-time components is analyzed in compelling circumstances.
Nonetheless, findings that are critical in such forms of real-time systems
can be stored relatively reliably and in time.
The code complexity and the measurement periods of the actual state
of the subsystem and all subsystems at all stages of the hierarchy
included in the real-time assessment are minimized by the MCA
dependent algorithm in the proposed risk level estimation model. Such
a determined risk level of the subsystem for the measurement of the
assessed variables and of the type which determines the risk level as the
output of the device. The remaining subsystems will, i.e., before the
calculation starts, be tested offline. Such above classes do not require

4
J. Chen et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

Fig. 3. System architecture of LSA-MCA.

reduction since the statistical nature of real-time calculations is not distinguished by the gravitational centers of each of them before and
impaired. after, as shown in Fig. 4. The product of the deduction is computed
The following types of rules may be interpreted if the observed demonstrated in (15)
subsystems are taken into account with the input parameters x1, x2, …, ∑ ∏
yn a
xn and output parameter y: *
V = i=n
∑ i=m∏ (15)
zn a
If u1 is a and u1 is Xn , THEN v is Yn , (10) i=n i=m

∑ ∏
where u1, Xais an antecedent and Yi1, ..., in the following sets of laws is a yn a
precedent number for input denotes antecedent and for information where, V* is the number of input parameters and ∑
i=n
z
i=m
∏
a
is the function
n
means precedent collection. All possible variations of rectangular type i=n i=m

input functions mentioned are used to define the rule history as in (11) of antecedents. (See Fig. 5.)
⎧ The reduction can be achieved by the MCA equation mentioned
⎨0 a < x above, where matrix E includes the gravity core and the effect regions. It
ω Xa = 1 a − x (11) consists of these values for the reduced rule base after the process, and
⎩
0a>x new component functions may be calculated using Eq. (16)
∑
where, a, x is the membership type parameter sets. The component roles ωa (Xi ) = ωa (Xi )Xa,i,k (16)
may be changed by modifying them. The new module utilizes this i=n

affiliation role adjustment to access unique adjustment capabilities, The first matrix scale E, and it is minimized to a greater extent of risk
which enables the particular aspects taken into consideration during the factors for each module. It implies that during the estimation, the above
evaluation, as shown in Fig. 3. Throughout the majority of the real-time rule will be calculated for such classes.
subsystems, affiliation functions are specified parameters. The roles of
the output toxicants are (1) well safe; (2) secure; (3) medium; (4). 4. Results and discussion
reasonably dangerous, and (5) highly risky. It has been in Eqs. (12)–(14)
⎧
⎨ 0.2 a < x The model is implemented at all times, and its performance in the
ωXa12 = 1.5 a − x (12) application development context has been tested. Integrated with this
⎩
0a>x creation method, and the program can be used extensively with various
applications in native form on different platforms. The test was con­
⎧
⎨ 1.2 a < x ducted based on technology. The data input is contained in a stan­
ωXa23 = 0a− x (13) dardized text file focused on the Oxygen percentage computer database.
⎩
0a>x It is tried to optimize the amount of aiming rules during the input
⎧ collection. The samples are representative of a variety of standard
⎨ 0a<x classes of e-waste between the as in Table 1 in all climatic conditions.
ωXa13 = 1.5 a − x (14) The module categories are defined as simple details and toxic of the
⎩
0a>x atmosphere. The protocol value of zero as the worst and strongest is
listed in Table 2. The importance is dependent on the procedure.
The following fluctuating range mentioned in (12)–(14) is
Table 1 shows the increase in recognized climatic change in the
aspect of the scale of cause on ten iterations. The result shows the in­
crease in data on every iteration and the overall gradual increase in
output. The proposed technique and results easily iterate all the aspects
of cause with the same effect in all iterations. The time taken for each
iteration is minimized; at that time, the available models for the same
analysis. It is then effectively increasing the precision of the method.
The input parameters and measurement method of this module are
focused on the technological requirements of the instruments. Calcula­
tion precision and the range of the training machine has taken during the
generation of data, as in Fig. 6. The RRR has developed based on the
monitor’s technological parameters. The scale is from 25 to 230 s, the
precision of which is ±5, whichever is greater.
Fig. 4. Third module status evaluation. Table 2 shows the increase in recognized measure of toxicants due to

5
J. Chen et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

Fig. 5. Third module output function.

Table 1
Climatic parameter evaluation comparison (%).
Parameters I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10

Average cause 50.3

50.6 58.5
Moderate cause 60.1 62.3 68.9
70.8 72.3 75.9 79.9
Weaker cause 80.1 80.8 81.3 82.3 82.5
83.6 84.7 86.2 87.1 88.2 88.8
Strong cause 89.9 89.9 90.3 90.4 91.2 91.7 91.9
92.3 92.4 92.6 92.7 92.8 92.9 93.0 93.0
Extreme cause 93.5 93.6 93.6 93.5 93.4 93.8 93.9 93.9 93.9
94.0 94.1 94.2 94.3 94.4 94.4 94.6 94.7 94.8 94.9

The real third module function is obtained at the previous hierarchical stage from the present second module section, as in Table 1.

Table 2
Toxicant status parameter evaluation (%).
Parameters I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10

Average cause 42.3

44.3 48.7
Moderate cause 50.1 52.6 53.9
55.8 56.9 58.4 59.9
Weaker cause 60.2 61.4 65.2 66.5 66.8
68.8 69.9 70.1 71.5 72.5 71.8
Strong cause 72.6 73.9 74.5 75.5 76.4 77.8 78.8
79.9 80.4 80.9 81.4 82.3 82.8 82.9 82.9
Extreme cause 83.6 83.9 84.1 84.7 86.8 87.8 88.8 89.1 89.2
90.1 90.1 90.2 91.3 92.4 92.4 93.8 93.5 93.9 94.1

e-waste contamination in the aspect of the scale of cause on ten itera­
tions. The result shows the gradual increase in data on every iteration
and the overall gradual increase in output. The main cause of pollution is
such toxicants and that are easily iterated by the proposed technique and
results with the same effect in all iterations. The time taken for each
iteration is minimized; at that point, the available models for the same
analysis. It is then effectively increasing the precision of the method.
It has always taken into consideration the purpose of the activity of
the e-waste processing module condition, as in Fig. 7. The first module is
equal to the first target module; the second module is the second and the
third target module, and the third is similar to the first target module.
The results indicate that three classes have been identified based on the

6
J. Chen et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

Fig. 8. Precision rate.

Recycle, Reuse, and Disposal. The theoretical degree of reduction of the

Fig. 6. Climatic parameter evaluation.
Fig. 7. Toxicants parameter evaluation.
target modules.
Besides, for each configuration at each hierarchy point as in Table 3,
the experiments have been carried out on two versions, the original
structure and a simplified framework, which take part in real-time. The
entire model has been tested based on scientific repositories. Both three
modules have evaluated the findings to determine the highest appro­
priate rate of decrease of the protocol, the pace at which exactness
criteria may be achieved securely as in Fig. 8.
From the Table 4, It is inferred that the error is too less than the other
methods. Since LSA is applied in the evolving architecture of manage­
ment, the error rate is lowered with the twofold increase in the good
determination of data. The proposed method achieves a lower error rate
of 08.4% than conventional methods. As the error rate decreases, it in­
creases the positive aspects of the model and increases the suitability of
the proposed approach to the evolution of future generation of waste
management.
The number of segregating mechanisms investigated is to Renew,
dependent on the highest appropriate amount of errors determined by
(4) and (5) has been investigated by adjusting the e-waste connection.
When the AIT is finished, integrated values are obtained, which are the
basis for the error measurement for an increasing element of the arrays
belonging to the real-time subsystems. Fig. 9 displays changes in error
rates in subsystems. Fig. 9 indicates the actual values of different device
parameters that are defined by the e-waste matrices. The top error limits
are determined to step-by-step raise the decrease. The integrated value is
discarded in each stage as long as the error limits are smaller than the
appropriate error point. The initial, inappropriate, error point has too
determined.
In the above mentioned setting the execution times of the reduced
and full models are contrasted. The implementation of the reduced
model may be carried out in about 30 ms; it requires around 30 ms for
the whole rule base. The total period for the execution depends on
several variables, such as design, the operating context, and the device
complexity. The relative period for implementation is more important
than the actual because it is not contingent on the variables as
mentioned earlier.
5. Conclusion
A hierarchic AIT model based on LSA and MCA is implemented in
this paper for estimating the danger level of the amount of real-time e-
waste processing based on Artificial Intelligence. The program suggested
tracks a condition in activities by constantly analyzing safety conditions
in real-time through customized danger models. It can avoid the crisis by
alerting the individual modules, secure and productive living if appro­
priate. The suggested model incorporates the benefits of the MCA
approach with the working mode at any moment. That ensures that the
model can be tailored from a numerical complexity perspective, can
accommodate incomplete, imperfections, or even lack of knowledge and
can even respond to the amount of test time momentarily accessible. The
hierarchical clustered model layout will respond flexibly to various
situations. The number of errors can be that, if necessary, and new de­
tails incorporated into the model can be introduced. In the unpredictable

Table 3
Pollutant status parameter evaluation (%).
Parameters I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10

Average cause 40.3

41.2 44.5
Moderate cause 45.8 46.2 46.8
50.8 51.8 52.5 52.9
Weaker cause 53.1 53.4 53.6 53.8 53.9
60.8 61.3 61.8 62.4 62.7 62.9
Strong cause 65.8 65.9 66.7 68.1 69.8 69.9 69.9
70.1 70.4 70.8 71.2 71.5 72.4 72.8 72.7
Extreme cause 74.1 76.5 79.8 80.1 82.4 86.5 87.8 88.2 89.5
90.5 90.2 90.8 91.4 91.8 92.5 93.4 93.8 94.0 94.4

7
J. Chen et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87 (2021) 106498

Table 4
Error rate status parameter evaluation (%).
Parameters I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10

Average cause 52.3

51.2 50.1
Moderate cause 49.9 49.2 48.7
47.1 45.4 44.1 41.3
Weaker cause 40.7 40.2 40.0 39.9 38.8
38.4 37.6 37.1 36.2 36.4 36.1
Strong cause 35.8 34.1 33.3 32.4 32.1 32.1 29.1
29.0 28.4 27.9 25.4 21.4 20.7 19.9 19.2
Extreme cause 18.8 18.5 18.2 17.4 16.5 12.5 11.8 11.2 11.0
10.5 10.2 09.8 09.2 09.7 09.1 09.0 08.8 08.0 08.4

Fig. 9. Error rate comparison.
cases, the proposed model operates at any given moment; the model is
tested despite the full model in the decreased AIT solution, thereby
minimizing the implementation period, without altering the efficiency.
According to the findings of the study, the numbers of rules can be easily
lowered to greater than 50% of the model, with a review of more than
several separate instances representing the main demographic modules.
This resulted in an assessment far faster than the initial guideline base.
The total performance can be shortened by 35% in time.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors don’t have any conflicts of Interest.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Major Program of National Social
Science Foundation of China (19ZDA082).
References
Abbasi, M., El Hanandeh, A., 2016. Forecasting municipal solid waste generation using
artificial intelligence modeling approaches. Waste Manag. 56, 13–22.
Abdel-Basset, M., Gunasekaran, M., Mohamed, M., Chilamkurti, N., 2019. A framework
for risk assessment, management and evaluation: economic tool for quantifying risks
in supply chain. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 90, 489–502.
Ahamed, A., Yin, K., Ng, B.J.H., Ren, F., Chang, V.C., Wang, J.Y., 2016. Life cycle
assessment of the present and proposed food waste management technologies from
environmental and economic impact perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 131, 607–614.
Angelo, A.C.M., Saraiva, A.B., Clímaco, J.C.N., Infante, C.E., Valle, R., 2017. Life Cycle
Assessment and Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: selection of a strategy for domestic
food waste management in Rio de Janeiro. J. Clean. Prod. 143, 744–756.
Bisinella, V., Conradsen, K., Christensen, T.H., Astrup, T.F., 2016. A global approach for
sparse representation of uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessments of waste management
systems. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 21 (3), 378–394.
Bovea, M.D., Powell, J.C., 2016. Developments in life cycle assessment applied to
evaluate the environmental performance of construction and demolition wastes.
Waste Manag. 50, 151–172.
Brancoli, P., Rousta, K., Bolton, K., 2017. Life cycle assessment of supermarket food
waste. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 118, 39–46.
de Souza Melaré, A.V., González, S.M., Faceli, K., Casadei, V., 2017. Technologies and
decision support systems to aid solid-waste management: a systematic review. Waste
Manag. 59, 567–584.
Ding, T., Xiao, J., Tam, V.W., 2016. A closed-loop life cycle assessment of recycled
aggregate concrete utilization in China. Waste Manag. 56, 367–375.
Elhoseny, M., Hosny, A., Hassanien, A.E., Muhammad, K., Sangaiah, A.K., 2017. Secure
automated forensic investigation for sustainable critical infrastructures compliant
with green computing requirements. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Comput. 5 (2), 174–191.
Kadry, S., 2013. Six sigma methodology for the environment sustainable development.
In: Mechanism Design for Sustainability. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 61–76.
Król, A., Nowakowski, P., Mrówczyńska, B., 2016. How to improve WEEE management?
Novel approach in mobile collection with the application of artificial intelligence.
Waste Manag. 50, 222–233.
Makkar, A., Kumar, N., 2018. User behavior analysis-based smart energy management
for webpage ranking: learning automata-based solution. Sustain. Comput. 20,
174–191.
Mastrucci, A., Marvuglia, A., Popovici, E., Leopold, U., Benetto, E., 2017. Geospatial
characterization of building material stocks for the life cycle assessment of end-of-
life scenarios at the urban scale. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 123, 54–66.
McAuliffe, G.A., Chapman, D.V., Sage, C.L., 2016. A thematic review of life cycle
assessment (LCA) applied to pig production. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 56, 12–22.
Menouer, T., Cérin, C., Hsu, C.H., 2020a. Opportunistic scheduling and resources
consolidation system based on a new economic model. J. Supercomput. 1–34.
Menouer, T., Cérin, C., Hsu, C.H., 2020b. Opportunistic scheduling and resources
consolidation system based on a new economic model. J. Supercomput. 1–34.
Nabavi-Pelesaraei, A., Bayat, R., Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Afrasyabi, H., Chau, K.W.,
2017. Modeling of energy consumption and environmental life cycle assessment for
incineration and landfill systems of municipal solid waste management-a case study
in Tehran Metropolis of Iran. J. Clean. Prod. 148, 427–440.
Qi, C., Fourie, A., Chen, Q., Zhang, Q., 2018. A strength prediction model using artificial
intelligence for recycling waste tailings as cemented paste backfill. J. Clean. Prod.
183, 566–578.
Rigamonti, L., Sterpi, I., Grosso, M., 2016. Integrated municipal waste management
systems: an indicator to assess their environmental and economic sustainability.
Ecol. Indic. 60, 1–7.
Ripa, M., Fiorentino, G., Vacca, V., Ulgiati, S., 2017. The relevance of site-specific data in
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The case of the municipal solid waste management in
the metropolitan city of Naples (Italy). J. Clean. Prod. 142, 445–460.
Salomone, R., Saija, G., Mondello, G., Giannetto, A., Fasulo, S., Savastano, D., 2017.
Environmental impact of food waste bioconversion by insects: application of life
cycle assessment to process using Hermetia illucens. J. Clean. Prod. 140, 890–905.
Sarc, R., Curtis, A., Kandlbauer, L., Khodier, K., Lorber, K.E., Pomberger, R., 2019.
Digitalisation and intelligent robotics in the value chain of circular economy-
oriented waste management–a review. Waste Manag. 95, 476–492.
Sharma, B.K., Chandel, M.K., 2017. Life cycle assessment of potential municipal solid
waste management strategies for Mumbai, India. Waste Manag. Res. 35 (1), 79–91.
Shyam, G.K., Manvi, S.S., Bharti, P., 2017, February. Smart waste management using
Internet-of-Things (IoT). In: 2017 2nd International Conference on Computing and
Communications Technologies (ICCCT). IEEE, pp. 199–203.
Sudha, S., Vidhyalakshmi, M., Pavithra, K., Sangeetha, K., Swaathi, V., 2016, July. An
automatic classification method for environment: friendly waste segregation using
deep learning. In: 2016 IEEE Technological Innovations in ICT for Agriculture and
Rural Development (TIAR). IEEE, pp. 65–70.
Turner, D.A., Williams, I.D., Kemp, S., 2016. Combined material flow analysis and life
cycle assessment as a support tool for solid waste management decision making.
J. Clean. Prod. 129, 234–248.