Search for: All records

Selecting negative training sites is an important challenge to resolve when utilizing machine learning (ML) for predicting hydrothermal resource favorability because ideal models would discriminate between hydrothermal systems (positives) and all types of locations without hydrothermal systems (negatives). The Nevada Machine Learning project (NVML) fit an artificial neural network to identify areas favorable for hydrothermal systems by selecting 62 negative sites where the research team had confidence that no hydrothermal resource exists. Herein, we compare the implications of the expert selection of negatives (i.e., the NVML strategy) with a random sample strategy, where it is assumed that areas outside the favorable structural ellipses defined by NVML are negative. Because hydrothermal systems are sparse, it is highly probable that, in the absence of a favorable geological structure, hydrothermal favorability is low. We compare three training strategies: 1) the positive and negative labeled examples from NVML; 2) the positive examples from NVML with randomly selected negatives in equal frequency as NVML; and 3) the positive examples from NVML with randomly selected negatives reflecting the expected natural distribution of hydrothermal systems relative to the total area. We apply these training strategies to the NVML feature data (input data) using two ML algorithms (XGBoost and logistic regression) to create six favorability maps for hydrothermal resources. When accounting for the expected natural distribution of hydrothermal systems, we find that XGBoost performs better than the NVML neural network and its negatives. Model validation was less reliable using F1 scores, a common performance metric, than comparing probability estimates at known positives, likely because of the extreme natural class imbalance and the lack of negatively labeled sites. This work demonstrates that expert selection of negatives for training in NVML likely imparted modeling bias. Accounting for the sparsity of hydrothermal systems and all the types of locations without hydrothermal systems allows us to create better models for predicting hydrothermal resource favorability. 

Previous moderate- and high-temperature geothermal resource assessments of the western United States utilized weight-of-evidence and logistic regression methodstoestimateresourcefavorability,buttheseanalyses relied uponsomeexpert decisions.Whileexpert decisions can add confidence to aspects of the modeling process by ensuring only reasonable models are employed, expert decisions also introduce human bias into assessments. This bias presents a source of error that may affect the performance of the models and resulting resource estimates. Our study aims to reduce expert input through robust data-driven analyses and better-suited data science techniques, with the goals of saving time, reducing bias, and improving predictive ability. We present six favorability maps for geothermal resources in the western United States created using two strategies applied to three modern machine learning algorithms (logistic regression, support- vector machines, and XGBoost). To provide a direct comparison to previous assessments, we use the same input data as the 2008 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conventional moderate- to high-temperature geothermal resource assessment. The six new favorability maps required far less expert decision-making, but broadly agree with the previous assessment. Despite the fact that the 2008 assessment results employed linear methods, the non-linear machine learning algorithms (i.e., support-vector machines and XGBoost) produced greater agreement with the previous assessment than the linear machine learning algorithm (i.e., logistic regression). It is not surprising that geothermal systems depend on non-linear combinations of features, and we postulate that the expert decisions during the 2008 assessment accounted for system non-linearities. Substantial challenges to applying machine learning algorithms to predict geothermal resource favorability include severe class imbalance (i.e., there are very few known geothermal systems compared to the large area considered), and while there are known geothermal systems (i.e., positive labels), all other sites have an unknown status (i.e., they are unlabeled), instead of receiving a negative label (i.e., the known/proven absence of a geothermal resource). We address both challenges through a custom undersampling strategy that can be used with any algorithm and then evaluated using F1 scores. 

Previous moderate- and high-temperature geothermal resource assessments of the western United States utilized weight-of-evidence and logistic regression methodstoestimateresourcefavorability,buttheseanalyses relied uponsomeexpert decisions.Whileexpert decisions can add confidence to aspects of the modeling process by ensuring only reasonable models are employed, expert decisions also introduce human bias into assessments. This bias presents a source of error that may affect the performance of the models and resulting resource estimates. Our study aims to reduce expert input through robust data-driven analyses and better-suited data science techniques, with the goals of saving time, reducing bias, and improving predictive ability. We present six favorability maps for geothermal resources in the western United States created using two strategies applied to three modern machine learning algorithms (logistic regression, support- vector machines, and XGBoost). To provide a direct comparison to previous assessments, we use the same input data as the 2008 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conventional moderate- to high-temperature geothermal resource assessment. The six new favorability maps required far less expert decision-making, but broadly agree with the previous assessment. Despite the fact that the 2008 assessment results employed linear methods, the non-linear machine learning algorithms (i.e., support-vector machines and XGBoost) produced greater agreement with the previous assessment than the linear machine learning algorithm (i.e., logistic regression). It is not surprising that geothermal systems depend on non-linear combinations of features, and we postulate that the expert decisions during the 2008 assessment accounted for system non-linearities. Substantial challenges to applying machine learning algorithms to predict geothermal resource favorability include severe class imbalance (i.e., there are very few known geothermal systems compared to the large area considered), and while there are known geothermal systems (i.e., positive labels), all other sites have an unknown status (i.e., they are unlabeled), instead of receiving a negative label (i.e., the known/proven absence of a geothermal resource). We address both challenges through a custom undersampling strategy that can be used with any algorithm and then evaluated using F1 scores.