Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Uncertainty in Geological Mapping - Lachlan Grose (Monash Uni.)

784 views

Published on

This presentation was delivered at the June 10 (2014) 3D Interest Group Meeting at the Centre for Exploration Targeting, UWA.

Published in: Science, Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Uncertainty in Geological Mapping - Lachlan Grose (Monash Uni.)

  1. 1. School of Geosciences Investigating uncertainty in geological maps using geological variability and geodiversity Lachlan Grose, Laurent Ailleres, Gautier Laurent and Peter Betts
  2. 2. What are geological maps? how do we create them? • A topological representation of geological interactions eg. Lithological boundaries, structures. • Essentially a 2D model • Human interpolation between outcrops guided by knowledge and experience • Interpolation is similar to how implicit 3D models are built • Studies looking into uncertainty in 3D models have used implicit scheme, we used 40 students 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 2
  3. 3. This study  Geological variability as a proxy for geological uncertainty  40 geological maps of the Eldee Structure, Broken Hill  Locate and quantifying geological variability between maps  Identify how maps vary geologically and geometrically due to variability  Classifies geological maps into “species” using the concept of biodiversity 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 3
  4. 4. Three types of uncertainty (Mann, 1993) 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 4 a.Error, bias and imprecision b.Inherent randomness c.Imprecise knowledge
  5. 5. A sample map of the Eldee structure 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 5  Metasediments – Clast-Bearing-Biotite-Gneiss (CBBG) – Interbedded Pelite and psamopelitic schist (IPP)  Large intrusive – Pegmatite  Smaller intrusive – Felsic gneiss – Amphibolite
  6. 6. Visualising variability  Stratigraphic variability (Lindsay et al. 2012) – Maximal when most common lithology is least well known – Assesses the quality of the average map  Information entropy (Shannon, 1958; Wellmann et al., 2012) – Determines amount of information missing from a system – Maximal when all lithologies are equally likely to occur 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 6
  7. 7. Stratigraphic variability (P) All maps2011 2012+ = Stratigraphic variability 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 7
  8. 8. All maps2011 2012+ = Confidence map 70% cutoff 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 8 CBBG IPP PEG FELS AMPH
  9. 9. Entropy (H) All maps2011 2012+ = Information entropy Information entropy (H) 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 9
  10. 10. Probability Felsic gneiss 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 10 All maps2011 2012+ =
  11. 11. Probability Amphibolite 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 11 All maps2011 2012+ =
  12. 12. Lawrence, 2008; Lindsay et al., 2013 Comparing maps using geodiversity • Biodiversity allows for; • Diversity of species described by a number of metrics • Trends in dataset to be identified • Geodiversity • Built on the concept of biodiversity • Geometrical and geological metrics can be used to analyse the diversity of a set of geological maps/models • Trends between maps can be found highlighting different “species” of maps/models 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 12
  13. 13. Analysing geodiversity • Principal Component Analysis (PCA) • Used by Lindsay et al. 2013 • Identifies linear trends in the dataset • A common dimension reduction technique • However many of the geodiversity metrics don’t follow standard distributions - which can introduce error! • May bias towards modal map (modal geodiversity values) • Self Organising Maps (SOMs) (Kohonen, 1982) • Fits a deformable mesh to the dataset capturing more details about the distribution of the original dataset • Also provides dimension reduction • Can be used to categorise groups of similar maps 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 13
  14. 14. Sml Med Lge Legs Feath ers Hair Hoove s Mane Run Swim Hunt Fly dove 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 hen 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 duck 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 goose 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 owl 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 hawk 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 eagle 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 fox 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 dog 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 wolf 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 cat 1 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 tiger 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 lion 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 horse 0 0 1 4 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 zebra 0 0 1 4 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 cow 0 0 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 A quick example of SOMs 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 14
  15. 15. SOMs component maps 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 15
  16. 16. Animal groups 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 16
  17. 17. Geodiversity metrics 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 17 Aspect ratio Geological Complexity Contact relationships Surface area and number of regions Orientation
  18. 18. SOMs geodiversity results 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 18 Number of regions PEGMATITE Number of regions FELSIC GNEISS Contact between INTERBEDDED AND FELSIC GNEISS Maximum surface area PEGMATITE Number of regions INTERBEDDED
  19. 19. Map “species” 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 19 Species 1 Species 2 Species 3
  20. 20. Probability The modal map 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 20 All maps2011 2012+ =
  21. 21. Conclusion 6th Febuary 2014Geological uncertainty in geological maps using variability and geodiversity 21  Variability observed between students interpretation of the geometry of lithological domains  The felsic gneiss and amphibolite were rarely mapped consistently in the one location ◦ We identified three distinct clusters highlight different mapping styles; lumpers, blobbers and the outliers! ◦ Self Organising Maps should be considered for further geodiversity analysis

×