Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Genetic algorithm to optimize the SVM and K-means algorithms for mapping of mineral prospectivity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Unsupervised clustering (e.g., K-means) and supervised machine learning [e.g., support vector machines (SVMs)] methods can be used in data-driven classification and predictive mapping of mineral prospectivity. In this study, the conceptual model of porphyry-type Cu deposits in Varzaghan district, Northwest Iran, was utilized to translate mineralization-related processes into mappable targeting criteria, resulting in six evidence layers derived from geochemical, geological, structural and remote sensing data. Then, traditional K-means clustering (KMC) method and a supervised SVM were employed to construct GIS-based mineral prospectivity maps. One of the challenging issues for generation of mineral prospectivity maps using clustering algorithms is to select suitable cluster centers (called centroids) in order to circumscribe the similar spatial features into meaningful clusters. Machine learning methods are strongly sensitive to hyperparameter values that contribute to prediction, as the prediction accuracy can significantly enhance when the optimized hyperparameters are calibrated to training procedure. To reach these goals, a genetic algorithm was incorporated into K-means and SVM in order to automatically select the optimized cluster centroids and tuned hyperparameters, respectively, and two new prospectivity models namely GKMC and genetic-based SVM were then generated. To evaluate the performance accuracy in training procedures of SVM and genetic-based SVM, K-fold cross-validation and confusion matrix were employed. Moreover, success-rate curves were plotted to compare the overall performance of unsupervised clustering models comprising KMC and GKMC and also supervised machine learning models comprising SVM and genetic-based SVM for detection of favorable areas associated with porphyry-type Cu mineralization. The results suggested the superiority of genetic-based SVM model over other models.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Code availability

The codes that support the findings of this study are available at figshare.com with the private link [https://figshare.com/s/3b36f43d714a2d6485d3].

References

  1. Aghazadeh M, Hou Z, Badrzadeh Z, Zhou L (2015) Temporal–spatial distribution and tectonic setting of porphyry copper deposits in Iran: constraints from zircon U-Pb and molybdenite Re–Os geochronology. Ore Geol Rev 70:385–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Akbari S, Ramazi H, Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A (2020) Geoelectrical integrated models for determining the geometry of karstic cavities in the Zarrinabad area, west of Iran: combination of fuzzy logic, CA fractal model and hybrid AHP-TOPSIS procedure. Carbonates Evaporites 35:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bigdeli A, Maghsoudi A, Ghezelbash R (2022) Application of self-organizing map (SOM) and K-means clustering algorithms for portraying geochemical anomaly patterns in Moalleman district, NE Iran. J Geochem Explor 233:106923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bonham-Carter GF (1989) Weights of evidence modeling: a new approach to mapping mineral potential. Stat Appl Earth Sci 89:171–183

    Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell C (2002) Kernel methods: a survey of current techniques. Neurocomputing 48:63–84

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Carranza E, Hale M, Faassen C (2008) Selection of coherent deposit-type locations and their application in data-driven mineral prospectivity mapping. Ore Geol Rev 33:536–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Carranza EJM, Laborte AG (2016) Data-driven predictive modeling of mineral prospectivity using random forests: a case study in Catanduanes Island (Philippines). Nat Resour Res 25:35–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Carranza EJM (2008) Geochemical anomaly and mineral prospectivity mapping in GIS. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chiang MM-T, Mirkin B (2007) Experiments for the number of clusters in k-means. In Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence, pp 395–405

  10. Cox DP, Singer DA (1986) Mineral deposit models. US Government Printing Office Bulletin

    Google Scholar 

  11. Daviran M, Maghsoudi A, Cohen DR, Ghezelbash R, Yilmaz H (2020) Assessment of various fuzzy c-mean clustering validation indices for mapping mineral prospectivity: combination of multifractal geochemical model and mineralization processes. Nat Resour Res 29(1):229–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Daviran M, Maghsoudi A, Ghezelbash R, Pradhan B (2021) A new strategy for spatial predictive mapping of mineral prospectivity: Automated hyperparameter tuning of random forest approach. Comput Geosci 148:104688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Daviran M, Parsa M, Maghsoudi A, Ghezelbash R (2022) Quantifying uncertainties linked to the diversity of mathematical frameworks in knowledge-driven mineral prospectivity mapping. Nat Resour Res 1–17

  14. Daviran M, Shamekhi M, Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi M (2022) Landslide susceptibility prediction using artificial neural networks, SVMs and random forest: hyperparameters tuning by genetic optimization algorithm. Int J Environ Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04491-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. de Palomera PA, Van Ruitenbeek FJ, Carranza EJM (2015) Prospectivity for epithermal gold–silver deposits in the Deseado Massif, Argentina. Ore Geol Rev 71:484–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fogel DB (1994) An introduction to simulated evolutionary optimization. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 5:3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A (2018) A hybrid AHP-VIKOR approach for prospectivity modeling of porphyry Cu deposits in the Varzaghan District. NW Iran Arab J Geosci 11:275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A (2018) Application of hybrid AHP-TOPSIS method for prospectivity modeling of Cu porphyry in Varzaghan district. Iran J Geosci 28(109):33–42

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Carranza EJM (2019) An improved data-driven multiple criteria decision-making procedure for spatial modeling of mineral prospectivity: adaption of prediction–area plot and logistic functions. Nat Resour Res 28:1299–1316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Carranza EJM (2019) Performance evaluation of RBF-and SVM-based machine learning algorithms for predictive mineral prospectivity modeling: integration of SA multifractal model and mineralization controls. Earth Sci Inf 12(3):277–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Carranza EJM (2019) Mapping of single-and multi-element geochemical indicators based on catchment basin analysis: application of fractal method and unsupervised clustering models. J Geochem Explor 199:90–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Daviran M (2019) Implementation of fuzzy-AHP and fuzzy-GAMMA approaches for discovering the prospectivity areas of Au mineralization in Takhte-Soleyman district

  23. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Carranza EJM (2020) Sensitivity analysis of prospectivity modeling to evidence maps: enhancing success of targeting for epithermal gold, Takab district. NW Iran Ore Geol Rev 120:103394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Carranza EJM (2020) Optimization of geochemical anomaly detection using a novel genetic K-means clustering (GKMC) algorithm. Comput Geosci 134:104335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghezelbash R, Maghsoudi A, Bigdeli A, Carranza EJM (2021) Regional-scale mineral prospectivity mapping: support vector machines and an improved data-driven multi-criteria decision-making technique. Nat Resour Res 30(3):1977–2005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Goldberg D (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading (Objective Function Value [Eq.(18)]).

  27. Guo H, Zhu K, Gao S, Liu T (2006) An improved genetic k-means algorithm for optimal clustering. In: Sixth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining-Workshops (ICDMW'06), pp 793–797

  28. Jain AK (2010) Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means. Pattern Recognit Lett 31:651–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jamali H, Mehrabi B (2015) Relationships between arc maturity and Cu–Mo–Au porphyry and related epithermal mineralization at the Cenozoic Arasbaran magmatic belt. Ore Geol Rev 65:487–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kavzoglu T, Colkesen I (2009) A kernel functions analysis for support vector machines for land cover classification. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 11:352–359

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kreuzer OP, Etheridge MA, Guj P, McMahon ME, Holden DJ (2008) Linking mineral deposit models to quantitative risk analysis and decision-making in exploration. Econ Geol 103:829–850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Krishna K, Murty MN (1999) Genetic K-means algorithm. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybern) 29:433–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Krishna K, Narasimha Murty M (1999) Genetic K-means algorithm. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybern) 29:433–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lisitsin V, González-Álvarez I, Porwal A (2013) Regional prospectivity analysis for hydrothermal-remobilised nickel mineral systems in western Victoria, Australia. Ore Geol Rev 52:100–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Maghsoudi A, Rahmani M, Rashidi B (2005) Gold deposits and indications of Iran Pars (Arian Zamin) geology research center

  36. McCuaig TC, Beresford S, Hronsky J (2010) Translating the mineral systems approach into an effective exploration targeting system. Ore Geol Rev 38:128–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mehrpartou M, Aminifazl A, Radfar J (1992) Geological map of Iran 1: 100,000 series. Geological Survey of Iran, Varzaghan

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mirkin B (2012) Clustering: a data recovery approach. CRC Press

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Pirajno F (2012) Hydrothermal mineral deposits: principles and fundamental concepts for the exploration geologist. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  40. Porwal A, Carranza EJM (2015) Introduction to the Special Issue: GIS-based mineral potential modelling and geological data analyses for mineral exploration. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  41. Porwal A, Carranza E, Hale M (2003) Artificial neural networks for mineral-potential mapping: a case study from Aravalli Province, Western India. Nat Resour Res 12:155–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Rodriguez-Galiano V, Sanchez-Castillo M, Chica-Olmo M, Chica-Rivas MJOGR (2015) Machine learning predictive models for mineral prospectivity: an evaluation of neural networks, random forest, regression trees and support vector machines. Ore Geol Rev 71:804–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rudolph G (1994) Convergence analysis of canonical genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 5:96–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Singer DA (2010) Progress in integrated quantitative mineral resource assessments. Ore Geol Rev 38:242–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Vapnik V (1998) Statistical learning theory. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang S, Li Y, Shao Y, Cattani C, Zhang Y, Du S (2017) Detection of dendritic spines using wavelet packet entropy and fuzzy support vector machine. CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets (Formerly Current Drug Targets-CNS & Neurological Disorders) 16(2):116–121

    Google Scholar 

  47. Wang SH, Jiang X, Zhang YD (2021) Multiple sclerosis recognition by biorthogonal wavelet features and fitness-scaled adaptive genetic algorithm. Front Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.737785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Wu C-H, Tzeng G-H, Goo Y-J, Fang W-C (2007) A real-valued genetic algorithm to optimize the parameters of support vector machine for predicting bankruptcy. Expert Syst Appl 32:397–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Xu R, Wunsch D (2005) Survey of clustering algorithms. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 16:645–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Zuo R, Carranza EJM (2011) Support vector machine: a tool for mapping mineral prospectivity. Comput Geosci 37:1967–1975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Zuo R, Zhang Z, Zhang D, Carranza EJM, Wang H (2015) Evaluation of uncertainty in mineral prospectivity mapping due to missing evidence: a case study with skarn-type Fe deposits in Southwestern Fujian Province, China. Ore Geol Rev 71:502–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mining Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

    Reza Ghezelbash & Abbas Maghsoudi

  2. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran

    Mehdi Shamekhi

  3. Centre for Advanced Modelling and Geospatial Information Systems (CAMGIS), Faculty of Engineering and IT, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Biswajeet Pradhan

  4. Department of Energy and Mineral Resources Engineering, Sejong University, Choongmu‐gwan, 209 Neungdong‐ro, Gwangjin‐gu, Seoul, 05006, Korea

    Biswajeet Pradhan

  5. School of Mining, Petroleum and Geophysics Engineering, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran

    Mehrdad Daviran

Authors
  1. Reza Ghezelbash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abbas Maghsoudi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehdi Shamekhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Biswajeet Pradhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mehrdad Daviran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RG: Wrote and revised the context of manuscript and contributed to generate MATLAB and GIS-based models as well as interpretation of the results. AM: Contributed to the interpretation of the results and revised the manuscript. MS: Wrote the context of manuscript and contributed to provide the algorithms applied in MATLAB. BP: Revised the manuscript. MD: Contributed to provide the algorithms applied in MATLAB and interpretation of the results.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Ghezelbash.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghezelbash, R., Maghsoudi, A., Shamekhi, M. et al. Genetic algorithm to optimize the SVM and K-means algorithms for mapping of mineral prospectivity. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 719–733 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07766-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07766-5

Keywords