Skip to main content
Log in

A Simple Unsupervised Classification Workflow for Defining Geological Domains Using Multivariate Data

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Within the natural resource industries, there is an increasing amount of data and number of variables being recorded when sampling a site. This has made multivariate geospatial datasets more difficult to analyze, in particular the definition of estimation or simulation domains used in geostatistical analysis. Establishing these domains is typically the first step for any subsequent geostatistical workflows or modeling. Domains are traditionally established using categorical data such as lithology, mineralization, or alteration from geological logging and are aimed at identifying distinct populations with particular geological, spatial, and statistical features. The manual logging process is time-consuming and costly but is required because defining geologically homogenous volumes is crucial for the planning, extraction, and processing of natural resources. Classical clustering methods have aided in analyzing the multivariate datasets, but the resulting clusters from these methods do not correlate well with geological logging and do not allow practitioners to input their knowledge of the domain in the clustering process. In this work, a simple unsupervised classification workflow is presented which allows the practitioner to input domain knowledge by selecting relevant variables to cluster reasonable geological domains. This can be used as a tool to aid the manual logging procedure or as a tool to establish domains for different uses such as defining zones with different rock hardness distributions which allows the corresponding volumes to be sent to appropriate mills for efficient mineral processing. The performance of the workflow is assessed on a mining dataset using the geochemical information and validated with the geological logging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Borsaru M, Zhou B, Aizawa T, Karashima H, Hashimoto T (2006) Automated lithology prediction from PGNAA and other geophysical logs. Appl Radiat Isot 64(2):272–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fouedjio F (2016) A hierarchical clustering method for multivariate geostatistical data. Spatial Stat 18:333–351

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Gaddum JH (1945) Lognormal distributions. Nature 156(3964):463–466

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Garza RAP, Titley SR, Pimentel BF (2001) Geology of the Escondida porphyry copper deposit, Antofagasta region, Chile. Econ Geol 96(2):307–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gwynn, X P, Brown M C, Mohr P J (2013) Combined use of traditional core logging and televiewer imaging for practical geotechnical data collection. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering: 261-272. Australian Centre for Geomechanics

  6. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. Springer Science & Business Media

  7. Herron MM, Herron SL (1990) Geological applications of geochemical well logging. Geol Soc Lond, Spec Publ 48(1):165–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Journel AG (1980) The lognormal approach to predicting local distributions of selective mining unit grades. J Int Assoc Math Geol 12(4):285–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kasmaee S, Raspa G, de Fouquet C, Tinti F, Bonduà S, Bruno R (2019) Geostatistical estimation of multi-domain deposits with transitional boundaries: a sensitivity study for the Sechahun Iron Mine. Minerals 9(2):115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Limpert E, Stahel WA, Abbt M (2001) Log-normal distributions across the sciences: keys and clues. BioScience 51(5):341–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. MacQueen, J (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability 1: 281-297

  12. Martin R, Boisvert J (2018) Towards justifying unsupervised stationary decisions for geostatistical modeling: ensemble spatial and multivariate clustering with geomodeling specific clustering metrics. Comput Geosci 120:82–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Oliver MA, Webster R (1989) A geostatistical basis for spatial weighting in multivariate classification. Math Geol 21(1):15–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ortiz J, Emery X (2006) Geostatistical estimation of mineral resources with soft geological boundaries: a comparative study. S Afr Instf Min Metall 106(8):577–584

    Google Scholar 

  15. Romary T, Ors F, Rivoirard J, Deraisme J (2015) Unsupervised classification of multivariate geostatistical data: two algorithms. Comput Geosci 85:96–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Romary T, Rivoirard J, Deraisme J, Quinones C, Freulon X (2012) Domaining by clustering multivariate geostatistical data. In: Geostatistics Oslo 455-466

  17. Ross PS, Bourke A, Fresia B (2013) A multi-sensor logger for rock cores: methodology and preliminary results from the Matagami mining camp, Canada. Ore Geol Rev 53:93–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sepúlveda E, Dowd PA, Xu C (2018) Fuzzy clustering with spatial correction and its application to geometallurgical domaining. Math Geosci 50(8):895–928

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Sillitoe RH (2010) Porphyry copper systems. Econ Geol 105(1):3–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ward JH (1963) Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 58(301):236–244

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Fouad Faraj received no specific funding for this work. Dr. Ortiz acknowledges the funding provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada (NSERC) grant number RGPIN-2017-04200 and RGPAS-2017-507956.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fouad Faraj.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faraj, F., Ortiz, J.M. A Simple Unsupervised Classification Workflow for Defining Geological Domains Using Multivariate Data. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 38, 1609–1623 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00428-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00428-5

Keywords

Navigation