Porphyry-type mineral prospectivity mapping with imbalanced data via prior geological transfer learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Implementation of geological concepts with deep learning for mineral prospectivity. • Exploration of transfer learning techniques via prior geological knowledge. • Weighted loss function to address class and sampling imbalanced data issues. • Pretext geological and feature data extraction task to enhance model prediction. Mineral prospectivity mapping is crucial for identifying areas with economically valuable minerals. Therefore, several methods based on machine learning have been applied to predict the likelihood of mineral occurrences, especially deep learning (DL), which provides a flexible and precise approach to the use of continuous data. It allows the approximation of predictive variables with probability values related to new ore targets. However, in the early stages of mineral exploration, DL-based methods face a challenge related to class and sampling imbalance due to scarce mineral deposits, resulting in a lack of enough samples to train, limiting the model’s predictive ability. This work proposed a detailed and systematic framework to address imbalanced data issues with prior geological transfer learning and a weighted loss function. We exploited the abundant pixel information of input variables to develop a pretext geological classification and a feature data extraction task as an initializer for the trainable variables of the neural network. The proposed workflow was tested in a porphyry-rich Yukon (Canada) region and overperformed other state-of-the-art classification algorithms such as random forest, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Moreover, our results were contrasted against different geological reports, where our mineral prospectivity map was coherent with regional and local potential assessments of porphyry-type mineral occurrences. The quantitative metrics with a validation dataset suggested that the proposed method can effectively predict mineral prospective areas in different imbalanced data scenarios.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".