Evaluation of Heterogeneous Ensemble Learning Algorithms for Lithological Mapping Using EnMAP Hyperspectral Data: Implications for Mineral Exploration in Mountainous Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperspectral remote sensing plays a crucial role in guiding and supporting various mineral prospecting activities. Combined with artificial intelligence, hyperspectral remote sensing technology becomes a powerful and versatile tool for a wide range of mineral exploration activities. This study investigates the effectiveness of ensemble learning (EL) algorithms for lithological classification and mineral exploration using EnMAP hyperspectral imagery (HSI) in a semi-arid region. The Moroccan Anti-Atlas mountainous region is known for its complex geology, high mineral potential and rugged terrain, making it a challenging for mineral exploration. This research applies core and heterogeneous ensemble learning methods, i.e., boosting, stacking, voting, bagging, blending, and weighting to improve the accuracy and robustness of lithological classification and mapping in the Moroccan Anti-Atlas mountainous region. Several state-of-the-art models, including support vector machines (SVMs), random forests (RFs), k-nearest neighbors (k-NNs), multi-layer perceptrons (MLPs), extra trees (ETs) and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), were evaluated and used as individual and ensemble classifiers. The results show that the EL methods clearly outperform (single) base classifiers. The potential of EL methods to improve the accuracy of HSI-based classification is emphasized by an optimal blending model that achieves the highest overall accuracy (96.69%). The heterogeneous EL models exhibit better generalization ability than the baseline (single) ML models in lithological classification. The current study contributes to a more reliable assessment of resources in mountainous and semi-arid regions by providing accurate delineation of lithological units for mineral exploration objectives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".