journal article·2024-01-03Open access

Research on 3D Geological Modeling Method Based on Deep Neural Networks for Drilling Data

Liang Liu, Tianbin Li, Chunchi Ma

Applied Sciences· Volume 14· Issue 1

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) models provide the most intuitive representation of geological conditions. Traditional modeling methods heavily depend on technicians’ expertise and lack ease of updating. In this study, we introduce a deep learning-based method for 3D geological implicit modeling, leveraging a substantial dataset of geological drilling data. By applying resampling and normalization techniques, we standardize drilling data and significantly expand the dataset, making it suitable for training deep neural networks. Utilizing the characteristics of the sample data, we design and establish the network structure, loss function, and parameter configurations, resulting in the training of a deep neural network with high accuracy and robust generalization capability. Ultimately, we utilize the dataset generated from the network’s predictions to render and construct the 3D geological model. The research in this paper demonstrates the significant promise of deep neural networks in addressing geological challenges. The deep learning-based implicit 3D modeling method surpasses traditional approaches in terms of generalization, convenience, and adaptability.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Geological Modeling and Analysis · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction · Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China

College of Environment and Civil Engineering, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China

Xi’an Surveying and Mapping Institute, Xi’an 710054, China

Funding

New Basic Surveying and Mapping Pilot of Xi’an, China

References (46)

Show source-provided references
1. Three-dimensional geometry and evolution of a segmented detachment fold, Mississippi Fan foldbelt, Gulf of Mexico10.1016/S0191-8141(96)00098-3 ↗
2. 3-D visualization of structural field data: Examples from the Archean Caopatina Formation, Abitibi greenstone belt, Québec, Canada10.1016/S0098-3004(99)00142-9 ↗
3. Three-dimensional reconstruction of geological surfaces: An example of growth strata and turbidite systems from the Ainsa basin (Pyrenees, Spain)10.1306/02260403062 ↗
4. Automated tools within workflows for 3D structural construction from surface and subsurface data10.1007/s10707-008-0059-y ↗
5. 3-D modeling of geologic maps from surface data10.1306/06270504108 ↗
6. Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge: Part II. Modelling validation using gravity and magnetic data inversion10.1016/j.pepi.2008.06.014 ↗
7. Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge: Part I. Modelling method coupling 3D potential-field interpolation and geological rules10.1016/j.pepi.2008.06.013 ↗
8. Challenges and trends for geological modelling and visualisation10.1007/s10064-005-0015-0 ↗
9. A structured approach to the measurement of uncertainty in 3D geological models
10. Towards incorporating uncertainty of structural data in 3D geological inversion10.1016/j.tecto.2010.04.022 ↗
11. Wu, L., Xue, L., Li, C., Lv, X., Chen, Z., Guo, M., and Xie, Z. (2015). A geospatial information grid framework for geological survey. PLoS ONE, 10.10.1371/journal.pone.0145312 ↗
12. Sobhana, N.V., Ghosh, S.K., and Mitra, P. (2012, January 7–9). Entity Relation Extraction from geological text using Conditional Random Fields and subsequence kernels. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual IEEE India Conference (INDICON), Kochi, India.10.1109/INDCON.2012.6420733 ↗
13. Spatiotemporal and semantic information extraction from Web news reports about natural hazards10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2014.11.001 ↗
14. A machine learning approach to extracting spatial information from geological texts in Chinese10.1080/13658816.2022.2087224 ↗
15. Understanding geological reports based on knowledge graphs using a deep learning approach10.1016/j.cageo.2022.105229 ↗
16. Geological mapping using remote sensing data: A comparison of five machine learning algorithms, their response to variations in the spatial distribution of training data and the use of explicit spatial information10.1016/j.cageo.2013.10.008 ↗
17. Predictive lithological mapping of Canada’s North using Random Forest classification applied to geophysical and geochemical data10.1016/j.cageo.2015.03.013 ↗
18. Integration of spectral, spatial and morphometric data into lithological mapping: A comparison of different Machine Learning Algorithms in the Kurdistan Region, NE Iraq10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.05.005 ↗
19. Lithologic mapping using Random Forests applied to geophysical and remote-sensing data: A demonstration study from the Eastern Goldfields of Australia10.1190/geo2017-0590.1 ↗
20. Mapping Himalayan leucogranites using a hybrid method of metric learning and support vector machine10.1016/j.cageo.2020.104455 ↗
21. Fusion of geochemical and remote-sensing data for lithological mapping using random forest metric learning10.1007/s11004-020-09897-8 ↗
22. Unsupervised machine learning for lithological mapping using geochemical data in covered areas of Jining, China10.1007/s11053-020-09788-z ↗
23. Inferring geological structural features from geophysical and geological mapping data using machine learning algorithms10.1111/1365-2478.13371 ↗
24. Using remote sensing data for geological mapping in semi-arid environment: A machine learning approach10.1007/s12145-021-00744-w ↗
25. Explicit-implicit-integrated 3-D geological modelling approach: A case study of the Xianyan Demolition Volcano (Fujian, China)10.1016/j.tecto.2020.228648 ↗
26. 3D modeling of large-scale geological structures by linear combinations of implicit functions: Application to a large banded iron formation10.1007/s11053-021-09901-w ↗
27. Three-dimensional geological modeling and spatial analysis from geotechnical borehole data using an implicit surface and marching tetrahedra algorithm10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106047 ↗
28. Iterative refinement of implicit boundary models for improved geological feature reproduction10.1016/j.cageo.2017.07.003 ↗
29. Variational Gaussian processes for implicit geological modeling10.1016/j.cageo.2023.105323 ↗
30. Li, B., Zhong, D., and Wang, L. (2021). Repair of geological models based on multiple material marching cubes. Mathematics, 9.10.3390/math9182207 ↗
31. Sun, H., Zhong, D., Wu, Z., and Wang, L. (2023). Multi-labeled Regularized Marching Tetrahedra Method for Implicit Geological Modeling. Math. Geosci., 1–30.10.1007/s11004-023-10075-9 ↗
32. Combining implicit geological modeling, field surveys, and hydrogeological modeling to describe groundwater flow in a karst aquifer10.1007/s10040-020-02220-z ↗
33. Implicit 3D geological modeling method for borehole data based on machine learning
34. Implicit simulation for three-dimensional spatial morphology of geological body based on marching cubes algorithm10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.195-196.807 ↗
35. Wang, J., Zhao, H., Bi, L., and Wang, L. (2018). Implicit 3D modeling of ore body from geological boreholes data using hermite radial basis functions. Minerals, 8.10.3390/min8100443 ↗
36. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems10.1111/j.1469-1809.1936.tb02137.x ↗
37. Learning representations by back-propagating errors10.1038/323533a0 ↗
38. Nair, V., and Hinton, G.E. (2010, January 21–24). Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines. Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine learning (ICML-10), Haifa, Israel.
39. Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic models
40. Clevert, D.A., Unterthiner, T., and Hochreiter, S. (2015). Fast and accurate deep network learning by exponential linear units (elus). arXiv.
41. Ramachandran, P., Zoph, B., and Le, Q.V. (2017). Searching for activation functions. arXiv.
42. Adaptive subgradient methods for online learning and stochastic optimization
43. Zeiler, M.D. (2012). Adadelta: An adaptive learning rate method. arXiv.
44. Lecture 6.5-rmsprop: Divide the gradient by a running average of its recent magnitude
45. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv.
46. Ioffe, S., and Szegedy, C. (2015). Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv.