Using Bayesian Neural Networks for Uncertainty Assessment of Ore Type Boundaries in Complex Geological Models
-
Published:2023-11-01
Issue:6
Volume:32
Page:2495-2514
-
ISSN:1520-7439
-
Container-title:Natural Resources Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Nat Resour Res
Author:
Jordão HelgaORCID, Sousa António JorgeORCID, Soares Amílcar
Abstract
AbstractBuilding an orebody model is a key step in the design and operation of a mine because it provides the basis for follow-up mine decisions. Recently, it was shown that convolutional neural networks can successfully reproduce the manual geological interpretation of a complex ore deposit. The deep learning approach mitigates the shortcomings of a labor-intensive process that greatly limits the speed at which geological resources can be updated. However, convolutional neural network architectures lack the ability to measure the confidence of their predictions. In this study, we tried to assess the uncertainty of the boundaries of these domains so that the characterization of metal grades within them can account for this uncertainty. We explored and compared Monte Carlo Dropout and Bayesian neural networks to assess the uncertainty of deep convolutional neural network models trained to predict geological domains conditioned to drill-hole data. Monte Carlo Dropout uncertainty maps reflect the uncertainty in geological interpretations. The uncertainty is highest in areas where the interpreter/geologist had more difficulty delineating the boundaries of geological bodies. This is known as geological interpretation uncertainty. In contrast, Bayesian neural network uncertainty is visible depending on ore type frequency, complexity, and heterogeneity. Bayesian neural networks are able to better represent the uncertainty regarding the unknown. The application example here is a real case study of several ore types from a polymetallic sulfide orebody located in the south of Portugal.
Funder
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia Universidade de Lisboa
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Environmental Science
Reference49 articles.
1. Abadi, M., Agarwal, A., Barham, P., Brevdo, E., Chen, Z., Citro, C., Corrado, G.S., Davis, A., Dean, J., Devin, M., Ghemawat, S., Goodfellow, I., Harp, A., Irving, G., Isard, M., Jia, Y., Jozefowicz, R., Kaiser, L., Kudlur, M., Levenberg, J., Mané, D., Monga, R., Moore, S., Murray, D., Olah, C., Schuster, M., Shlens, J., Steiner, B., Sutskever, I., Talwar, K., Tucker, P., Vanhoucke, V., Vasudevan, V., Viégas, F., Vinyals, O., Warden, P., Wattenberg, M., Wicke, M., Yu, Y., Zheng, X., 2015. TensorFlow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems. Software available from tensorflow.org. arXiv:1603.04467. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1603.04467 2. Abdar, M., Pourpanah, F., Hussain, S., Rezazadegan, D., Liu, L., Ghavamzadeh, M., Fieguth, P., Cao, X., Khosravi, A., Acharya, U. R., Makarenkov, V., & Nahavandi, S. (2021). A review of uncertainty quantification in deep learning: Techniques, applications and challenges. Information Fusion, 76, 243–297. 3. Alabert, F. (1987). Stochastic imaging of spatial distributions using hard and soft information (Master’s thesis). Stanford University. 4. Al-Mudhafar, W. J. (2017). Multiple-point geostatistical lithofacies simulation of fluvial sand-rich depositional environment: A case study from Zubair formation/south Rumaila oil field. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 21(01), 39–53. 5. Armstrong, M., Galli, A., Le-Loch, G., Geffroy, F., & Eschard, R. (2003). Plurigaussian simulations in geosciences. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19607-2
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|