Prospectivity map generation techniques greatly assist geologists and mining companies in identifying areas with high mineral potential without physically visiting that area. It reduces their exploration cost and exploration. In this study, we have targeted the Limestone, a rich mineral resource found in Mardan, within Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Pakistan. We used different techniques to analyze this area while considering different datasets/imageries. Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 data were considered for the prospectivity maps generation using machine learning models. Data was collected as different samples labeled into four classes namely Limestone, Urban, Barren, and Vegetation using the Geo Survey App. Data was trained and then tested using different machine-learning models with different kernel functions. After applying machine learning we came up with detailed maps showing the prospectivity of each class in that particular area. The detailed data of each model with its accuracy and kappa coefficient is shown in the tables below.
The results of different band ratios and PCA techniques highlight a certain area where there is a probability of the presence of Limestone. The different band composites using False Color Composite (FCC) are very helpful in lithological mapping. FCC of the ratio of 7/5, 6/4, and 4/2 band combinations are indicated in Figure 7(b). The plum color as highlighted shows an area that that has the possibility of the presence of Limestone. Similarly, the RGB of the ratio of 7/5, 3/2, and 4/5 band combinations is indicated in Figure 7(c). The pinkish color Limestone shows the possibility of the presence of Limestone [34].
In the same way, PCA is known for enhancing the image details adding more clarity, and highlighting the area that contains the Limestone. PC1, PC4, and PC3 are selected that contain more relevant information regarding carbonates [35]. PC1 has more bending towards carbonates. FCC of PC1, PC3, and PC4 was generated using RGB color composite and the result is displayed in Figure 7(d). In this analysis, the dark reddish area has the possibility of the presence of Limestone.
Remote sensing multispectral data is used to generate prospectivity maps, which identify areas that are likely to contain specific mineral or geological resources. After training the machine learning models on the prepared training data prospectivity maps are generated to highlight areas having the possibility to contain the Limestone. The Perspectivity maps against each technique using remotely sensed data are shown below in detail. In the maps below red area highlights the Limestone, blue highlights the Urban, green highlights the vegetation, and brown highlights the barren. The perspectivity map and accuracy of Sentinel-2 using SVM with different functions are shown in Figure 8 and Table 2. After testing SVM using different functions like linear, polynomial of degree 2, and radial basis, on the Sentinel-2 data, we have achieved the maximum accuracy of 88.38% using the radial basis function. SVM using different functions like linear, polynomial of degree 2, and radial basis on Landsat-8 data, also tested on Landsat-8, we have achieved the maximum accuracy of 80.57 using a linear function shown in Table 2. The prospectivity maps for the same are shown in Figure 9. The model is lagging accuracy when compared with the accuracy achieved in finding Limestone outcrop in the southwestern portion of the Potiguar Sedimentary Basin, Brazil [11]. The study was conducted using multispectral data from Landsat-8 employing machine models like MLP, SVM, and RF. The model was evaluated using the Confusion matrix and Mathews correlation coefficient (MCC). After proper training and testing of an SVM model, they achieved an accuracy of 91.87%. In the same way, SVM was applied on the Landsat-8 integrated with DEM of ALOS/PALSAR data for mapping Limestone at Souk Arbaa Sahel, Western Anti-Atlas, Morocco [12]. SVM with radial basis function was considered for this study because it carries good interpolation capabilities. An accuracy of 85% with a kappa value of 0.83 was achieved. It was also observed that our accuracy was leading when compared with another study conducted for the region, Bas Drâa inlier, Moroccan Anti Atlas. They used multispectral Landsat-8 data to map Limestone [36]. The model they selected was SVM. After proper training and testing of the model, they achieved an accuracy of 60.19% with kappa coefficients of 0.53. The detailed accuracy of each SVM function with its user and producer accuracy is shown in Table 2.
The same data, Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2, were then trained and tested using a Neural Network (NN) model on different iterations like 50,100,200,300. We have used the single hidden layer of NN for this analysis. After proper parameters tunning we achieved the maximum accuracy of 94.92% on 50 iterations which is shown in Table 3. The maps against each iteration were generated and shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12. The results of this technique are leading in terms of accuracy when compared with accuracy in finding Limestone outcrop in the southwestern portion of the Potiguar Sedimentary Basin in Brazil [11]. The study was conducted using multispectral data of Landsat-8 data employing machine models like MLP, SVM, and RF. The model was evaluated using the Confusion matrix and Mathew’s correlation coefficient (MCC). After proper training and testing of an MLP model, they achieved an accuracy of 92.14%. In the same way, NN was applied to the Landsat-8 data for mapping Limestone in Souk Arbaa Sahel Western Anti-Atlas, Morocco, the region [12]. The NN with a single layer was considered for training and testing and reached an accuracy of 68.40% with a Kappa coefficient of 0.65%, respectively.
The detailed accuracy of each iteration with its user’s and producer’s accuracy is shown in Table 3. From the above discussion, we could say that SVM itself is an effective model and has capabilities to predict and map different minerals remotely and NN is also known most complex problem-solving model in the domain of pattern recognition, pattern identification, and classification. But, the accuracy or the performance of a model varies with its area of application. The geography of the area greatly affects the model performance as we discussed earlier both models (SVM, NN) were tested for mapping Limestone using different areas/regions but the performance of the model was different on each pilot region. The accuracy/performance of a model also depends on the data on which the model was trained and tested. In the above discussion of SVM, we have tested the model for both Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 data but SVM was performing well on Sentinel-2 data and an accuracy of 88.39% was achieved. Then, we changed the model from SVM to NN and tested the model for both Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8, it was performing well on Landsat-8 and gave the maximum accuracy of 94.92%. In the context of our study, we suggest that NN when trained on Landsat-8 data produces the best results.
To study the behavior of these models we have generated another image by temporarily stacking Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 data bands. The resultant temporal stacked image (Composite Image) consists of a total of 17 bands of which 8 bands were from Landsat-8, and the remaining 9 were from Sentinel-2. The composite image was then used to train the SVM and NN models. The perspectivity map and accuracy of Composite image data using SVM with different functions are shown in Table 2 and Table 3. The prospectivity maps of the same composite image were generated and shown in Figure 10 and Figure 13.
With SVM on Composite image data, we have achieved the maximum accuracy of 71.95% using a linear function, and with the same data when classified using a Neural Network (NN), we have reached the maximum accuracy of 92.64% on 50 iterations. The results of this Composite image data show that SVM is still not performing well on this composite image data, but NN is still leading in performance. Although the performance of NN on composite image data is less than the performance of Landsat-8 it's still much better than Sentinel-2's performance.
[1] J. L. Bishop et al., “Spectral Properties of Anhydrous Carbonates and Nitrates,” Earth Sp. Sci., vol. 8, no. 10, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1029/2021EA001844.
[2] M. Sekandari et al., “Application of Landsat-8, Sentinel-2, ASTER and WorldView-3 Spectral Imagery for Exploration of Carbonate-Hosted Pb-Zn Deposits in the Central Iranian Terrane (CIT),” Remote Sens. 2020, Vol. 12, Page 1239, vol. 12, no. 8, p. 1239, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.3390/RS12081239.
[3] M. Greenacre, P. J. F. Groenen, T. Hastie, A. I. D’Enza, A. Markos, and E. Tuzhilina, “Principal component analysis,” Nat. Rev. Methods Prim. 2022 21, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–21, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1038/s43586-022-00184-w.
[4] Q. Ren, H. Zhang, D. Zhang, and X. Zhao, “Lithology identification using principal component analysis and particle swarm optimization fuzzy decision tree,” J. Pet. Sci. Eng., vol. 220, p. 111233, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1016/J.PETROL.2022.111233.
[5] F. Abdelouhed, A. Algouti, A. Algouti, M. Ait Mlouk, and M. Ifkirne, “Lithological mapping using Landsat 8 Oli multispectral data in Boumalne, Imider, and Sidi Ali Oubork, High Central Atlas, Morocco,” E3S Web Conf., vol. 234, p. 00017, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1051/E3SCONF/202123400017.
[6] N. Simon, C. Aziz Ali, K. Roslan Mohamed, and K. Sharir, “Best Band Ratio Combinations for the Lithological Discrimination of the Dayang Bunting and Tuba Islands, Langkawi, Malaysia,” Sains Malaysiana, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 659–667, 2016.
[7] B. Mohammed, S. Hasan, and A. Mohsin Abdulazeez, “A Review of Principal Component Analysis Algorithm for Dimensionality Reduction,” J. Soft Comput. Data Min., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 20–30, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.30880/jscdm.2021.02.01.003.
[8] M. H. Tangestani and S. Shayeganpour, “Mapping a lithologically complex terrain using Sentinel-2A data: a case study of Suriyan area, southwestern Iran,” Int. J. Remote Sens., vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 3558–3574, May 2020, doi: 10.1080/01431161.2019.1706203.
[9] T. Sun, F. Chen, L. Zhong, W. Liu, and Y. Wang, “GIS-based mineral prospectivity mapping using machine learning methods: A case study from Tongling ore district, eastern China,” Ore Geol. Rev., vol. 109, pp. 26–49, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/J.OREGEOREV.2019.04.003.
[10] M. F. A. Khan, K. Muhammad, S. Bashir, S. U. Din, and M. Hanif, “Mapping Allochemical Limestone Formations in Hazara, Pakistan Using Google Cloud Architecture: Application of Machine-Learning Algorithms on Multispectral Data,” ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information 2021, Vol. 10, Page 58, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 58, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/IJGI10020058.
[11] V. Sales et al., “Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Carbonate Outcrop Image Classification in Landsat 8 Satellite Data,” Int. Geosci. Remote Sens. Symp., vol. 2022-July, pp. 3604–3607, 2022, doi: 10.1109/IGARSS46834.2022.9883577.
[12] I. Bachri, M. Hakdaoui, M. Raji, A. C. Teodoro, and A. Benbouziane, “Machine Learning Algorithms for Automatic Lithological Mapping Using Remote Sensing Data: A Case Study from Souk Arbaa Sahel, Sidi Ifni Inlier, Western Anti-Atlas, Morocco,” ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information 2019, Vol. 8, Page 248, vol. 8, no. 6, p. 248, May 2019, doi: 10.3390/IJGI8060248.
[13] B. Es-Sabbar, A. Essalhi, M. Essalhi, and B. Karaoui, “Variscan structural evolution and metallogenic implications at the paleozoic maider basin, eastern anti-atlas, Morocco,” J. African Earth Sci., vol. 207, p. 105060, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/J.JAFREARSCI.2023.105060.
[14] C. Zheng et al., “Mineral prospectivity mapping based on Support vector machine and Random Forest algorithm – A case study from Ashele copper–zinc deposit, Xinjiang, NW China,” Ore Geol. Rev., vol. 159, p. 105567, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1016/J.OREGEOREV.2023.105567.
[15] M. Abedini, M. Ziaii, T. Timkin, and A. B. Pour, “Machine Learning (ML)-Based Copper Mineralization Prospectivity Mapping (MPM) Using Mining Geochemistry Method and Remote Sensing Satellite Data,” Remote Sens. 2023, Vol. 15, Page 3708, vol. 15, no. 15, p. 3708, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.3390/RS15153708.
[16] H. Li et al., “Convolutional neural network and transfer learning based mineral prospectivity modeling for geochemical exploration of Au mineralization within the Guandian–Zhangbaling area, Anhui Province, China,” Appl. Geochemistry, vol. 122, p. 104747, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1016/J.APGEOCHEM.2020.104747.
[17] M. Yao, Z. Jiangnan, M. Yao, and Z. Jiangnan, “Advances in the application of machine learning methods in mineral prospectivity mapping,” Bull. Geol. Sci. Technol. 2021, Vol. 40, Issue 1, Pages 132-141, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 132–141, doi: 10.19509/J.CNKI.DZKQ.2021.0108.
[18] K. Wang, X. Zheng, G. Wang, D. Liu, and N. Cui, “A Multi-Model Ensemble Approach for Gold Mineral Prospectivity Mapping: A Case Study on the Beishan Region, Western China,” Miner. 2020, Vol. 10, Page 1126, vol. 10, no. 12, p. 1126, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.3390/MIN10121126.
[19] M. E. D. Chaves, M. C. A. Picoli, and I. D. Sanches, “Recent Applications of Landsat 8/OLI and Sentinel-2/MSI for Land Use and Land Cover Mapping: A Systematic Review,” Remote Sens. 2020, Vol. 12, Page 3062, vol. 12, no. 18, p. 3062, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.3390/RS12183062.
[20] “Geo Survey - Land Survey - Apps on Google Play.” Accessed: Nov. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ncbc.survey.gis&hl=en&gl=US&pli=1
[21] R. H. Topaloğlu and E. Sertel, “ASSESSMENT OF CLASSIFICATION ACCURACIES OF SENTINEL-2 AND LANDSAT-8 DATA FOR LAND COVER / USE MAPPING”, doi: 10.5194/isprsarchives-XLI-B8-1055-2016.
[22] W. Khan et al., “On the Performance of Temporal Stacking and Vegetation Indices for Detection and Estimation of Tobacco Crop,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 103020–103033, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2998079.
[23] B. Mahesh, “Machine Learning Algorithms—A Review.,” International Journal of Science and Research. Accessed: Nov. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.scirp.org/(S(i43dyn45te-exjx455qlt3d2q))/reference/referencespapers.aspx?referenceid=3168174
[24] T. T. Dai and Y. S. Dong, “Introduction of svm related theory and its application research,” Proc. - 2020 3rd Int. Conf. Adv. Electron. Mater. Comput. Softw. Eng. AEMCSE 2020, pp. 230–233, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1109/AEMCSE50948.2020.00056.
[25] I. Roman, R. Santana, A. Mendiburu, and J. A. Lozano, “In-depth analysis of SVM kernel learning and its components,” Neural Comput. Appl., vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 6575–6594, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1007/S00521-020-05419-Z/METRICS.
[26] L. Sunitha and M. B. Raju, “Multi-class classification for large datasets with optimized SVM by non-linear kernel function,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 2089, no. 1, p. 012015, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2089/1/012015.
[27] S. Sharma, S. Srivastava, A. Kumar, and A. Dangi, “Multi-Class Sentiment Analysis Comparison Using Support Vector Machine (SVM) and BAGGING Technique-An Ensemble Method,” 2018 Int. Conf. Smart Comput. Electron. Enterp. ICSCEE 2018, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.1109/ICSCEE.2018.8538397.
[28] O. I. Abiodun, A. Jantan, A. E. Omolara, K. V. Dada, N. A. E. Mohamed, and H. Arshad, “State-of-the-art in artificial neural network applications: A survey,” Heliyon, vol. 4, no. 11, p. 938, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.1016/J.HELIYON.2018.E00938/ATTACHMENT/7F6968D1-2173-4A69-BC61-62AD41135D5C/MMC2.
[29] A.-N. Sharkawy, “Principle of Neural Network and Its Main Types: Review,” J. Adv. Appl. Comput. Math., vol. 7, pp. 8–19, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.15377/2409-5761.2020.07.2.
[30] S. Singu and S. Singu, “Comparative Analysis of Artificial Neural Networks,” Int. J. Mach. Learn. Sustain. Dev., vol. 3, no. 4, Dec. 2021, Accessed: Nov. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.ijsdcs.com/index.php/IJMLSD/article/view/192
[31] A. Tharwat, “Classification assessment methods,” Appl. Comput. Informatics, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 168–192, 2018, doi: 10.1016/J.ACI.2018.08.003/FULL/PDF.
[32] J. S. Y. K. F. F. Howard, C. B. Boye, I. Yakubu, “Image Classification and Accuracy Assessment Using the Confusion Matrix, Contingency Matrix, and Kappa Coefficient,” Int. J. Comput. Inf. Eng, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 511–518, 2023.
[33] W. Tang, J. Hu, H. Zhang, P. Wu, and H. He, “Kappa coefficient: a popular measure of rater agreement,” Shanghai Arch. psychiatry, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 62–67, 2015, doi: 10.11919/J.ISSN.1002-0829.215010.
[34] H. Ghrefat, A. Y. Kahal, K. Abdelrahman, H. J. Alfaifi, and S. Qaysi, “Utilization of multispectral landsat-8 remote sensing data for lithological mapping of southwestern Saudi Arabia,” J. King Saud Univ. - Sci., vol. 33, no. 4, p. 101414, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1016/J.JKSUS.2021.101414.
[35] A. Ja’afar Abubakar, M. Hashim, and A. Beiranvand, “USING LANDSAT 8 (OLI) REMOTE SENSING DATA TO MAP LITHOLOGY AND MINERALOGY FOR GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE EXPLORATION”.
[36] “Lithological mapping using Landsat 8 OLI and Terra ASTER multispectral data in the Bas Drâa inlier, Moroccan Anti Atlas.” Accessed: Nov. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/journal-of-applied-remote-sensing/volume-10/issue-01/016005/Lithological-mapping-using-Landsat-8-OLI-and-Terra-ASTER-multispectral/10.1117/1.JRS.10.016005.full