Post on 03-Feb-2018
OneGeology-Europe – an INSPIRE testbed for semantic harmonisation of „geology“ data
across Europe (WP 3)
Kristine Asch and John Laxton
Project deliverables
• Interoperable on-shore geology spatial dataset
• with ”progress towards harmonisation”
• Geological vocabulary and data specifications for Europe
• Use case studies
• Mutilingual metadata for discovery
• View services• Forerunner and “guinea
pig” for the implementation of INSPIRE Directive
© BGR.deKristine Asch
Fact
Vast amount of data hidden in the archives and hard disks in governmental organisations across Europe …
Edge matching at national boundaries?
National National boundaryboundarygeological terms and geological terms and classificationsclassifications (age, (age, lithology, lithology, tectonicstectonics ..)..)age of data age of data (mapping (mapping campaigncampaign) ) choicechoice of units of units to be to be mappedmappedlevellevel of detail / scaleof detail / scaletopographicaltopographical basebase((projectionprojection, , spheroidspheroid, , drainagedrainage system, ...)system, ...)Portrayal (Portrayal (colourscolours and and symbolssymbols))MappedMapped borderborder of the of the unitsunits
And they are all different..
• Interoperability – when the data model/structure and properties to describe its parts (what GeoSciML does) is agreed
– E.g. agreeing a data model will have the feature of “GeologicUnit”with properties of “age” and “lithology”
• Semantic harmonisation – when the use of the same definitions and classifications to describe a concept/term is agreed
– E.g. ‘clay’. The same concept can be labelled with several terms (“argilla” in Italian, “Ton” in German), but needs to have the same definition, in this case of “clay/Ton/argilla, …”): > 50% particles < 0,004 mm (Wentworth grade scale), or: > 50% particles < 0,002 mm (ISO 14688)
• Geometric harmonisation – edge-matching at national boundaries
Interoperability and harmonisation
BasaltBasalt
BasaltBasalt
Semantic harmonisation
Geometric harmonisation
Alkali olivine basalt
Alkali Alkali olivine olivine basaltbasalt
BasaltBasaltBasalt
Harmonized?
Alkali Alkali olivine olivine basaltbasalt
BasaltBasaltBasalt
national boundary
BasaltBasaltBasalt
BasaltBasaltBasalt Harmonized!
interoperable
50 km50 km
The 1G-EGeology Vocabulary
• 516 agreed defined terms, definitions and parent/child relations:– lithology (sedimentary, magmatic, metamorphic)– geological age – genesis– faults and structures
• Taken on board: 532 review comments from 20 national data + 2 global NGOs
• > 100 new terms and definitions fed into the global geoscience vocabulary of the IUGS Commission of Geoscience Information
• Portrayal rules for age, lithology and structures• Explanatory Notes how to encode in GeoSciencel ML
►THE base for semantic harmonisation►Enables comparability of the information►Basis for cross-boundary planning
Portrayal Rulesvisualizing the content –
and its lack of harmonisation …
Vocabulary Building
Extract
Global CGIVocabulary
1GE-core Team
1GEuropescientificrequire-ments
1G-E Vocabulary
Review
DRAFTParticularilyEuropean(e.g. orogenies)
Vocabulary Challenges
• Agreement: 10 individual countryrepresentatives defining the vocabulary (terms and definitions)
• 20 national representatives reviewing• The (English) project Language – a
neverending source for misunderstanding• Integration with the global CGI vocabulary
group – many heated discussions via e-mail, phone and in meetings
• Short time available• Acceptance …. The need for a common
denominator was not seen by all project participants from the start
• 26 experts• 18 nations (EC)• 2 days
WP 3 GeologyHarmonisation Workshop, Slovenia
Tasks:• Define generic harmonisation issues • Solve these individually• Develop a workflow/method how to tackle this
Base: use of the 1G-E vocabulary
National boundarymismatches
Our 1st obstacle
Data gaps –no content
HarmonisationWorkshop issues
• Hardly any country has harmonised itsboundaries semantically and/or geometrically
• Political issues… who provides Gibraltar, Northern Ireland?
• Base problem: the difference of scales; target scale 1/1000.000 includes 1/250.000, 1/300.000, 1/400.000, 1/500 000, 1/625 000, 1/1 000 000 –> our advise: define the scale if there is a strong necessity for data harmonisation
• Many mismatches solvable by bilateral negotiation, by use of more detailed data sets/maps and publications
• However, there will mismatches remain that can only be solved with additional field work !
Geological harmonisation:Draft of a
general workflow processCondition: parties use same conceptual model and vocabulary
Identify and classify mismatches
Define properties to be harmonized
Inform neighbours and start negotiating process
Define level of harmonisation
Modify just identifiedborder polygonesModify general unit
Mark feature
Solvable by negotiation? yesno
Generalize semantic/snap boundaries
minor
major
Tools: Mismatch matrix
Expert group
Expert group
Mediator
Neighbours
Tools
Summary and Conclusions
• The work on the OneG-E data vocabulary enriched and improved the global CGI vocabulary
• It has been reviewed and agreed by 20+4 countries (subsidiarity principle)
• Provides a solid base, easy-to-use vocabulary to describe the geology of Europe
• Explanation notes are written to help the implementation• Provides a geology vocabulary and basis for semantic
harmonisation of geology in Europe • Reference material for the INSPIRE Geology and Mineral
Resources Data TWG GE-MR Specification TWG GE-MR….
• “progress-towards-harmonisation” report provides guidance for future cross-border consistency and harmonisation
Thanks to:
• Ian Jackson• Steve Richard, CGI• Garry Baker• Robert Tomas • Jean-Jacques Serrano• Agnès Tellez-Arenas• Marco Klicker• Horst Troppenhagen • Mikko Nironen• Urzula Stepien• Pjotr Czupek
• Francois Robida• Luca DeMicheli• Claudia Delfini• Aleksandra Kuczerawy• Alexander Tschistiakow• Stephan Gruijters• Mary Carter• Marco Pantaloni• Fernando Perez• Stefan Bergman• Stefan Kacer• Pavla Guertlerova
• Jolanta Cylene• Chris Schubert• Sybille Hennings• Kathryn Bull• Dominique Janjou• Milos Bavec• Alan Smith• Pierre-Yves Declerq• Monika • and many more of
the 1G-E Team …
Invitation to theIUGS-CGI
GeoScience Language Workshop+ Open GeoSciML Day
25.-27. August 2010Berlin
Topics:Ontologies, vocabularies and terms:
Developments and implementionRegistration:
Susanna.Koesterke@bgr.deKristine.Asch@bgr.de
Lessons learned
WP 3 HarmonisationWorkshop in Slovenia
Ouch, yes, I will do anything, I will even
HARMONIZE !! Aaaargh!!
“The classification of the sedimentary rocks is a problem on which much thought has been expended and one for which no mutually satisfactory or complete solution has yet been found" !!!!!
F. J. Pettijohn (1975)
More information on OneGeology-Europe
http://onegeology-Europe.org
More information on OneGeology (global)
http://onegeology.org
The 1G-E vocabulary in numbers
• 532 Review comments to the Scientific Data Specification D3.1 V1, 2009
Revised vocabulary 2010• 163 Lithology terms • 197 age terms• 82 Genesis terms
(42 environments + 40 processes)• 15 Orogenic Events • 12 Fault type terms • 11 Metamorphic Facies terms
• 6 Metamorphic Grade terms• 6 Proportion terms • 6 Geologic unit part role terms• 5 Contact type terms • 4 Geologic unit Type terms• 3 Geologic unit Morphology
terms• 2 Feature Observation Method
terms • 1 Mapped Feature Observation
Method term
agenda
• One Geology – Europe• Discrepancies• The vocabulary• The vocabulary by numbers• Building the vocabulary:
- develop requirements independently- scrutinizing global standards, extract- recognition and defining of gaps- merge
• The stony way to a global herd … examples• CGI multihierarchie contra single
• Challenges• Products
1G-E WP3 Vocabulary Sources
Bates, R.L. & Jackson, J.A. (1987): Glossary of Geology (3rd ed.). American Geological Institute; 788 p.; Alexandria, Virginia.
Bingen, B., et al. (2008): The Mesoproterozoic in the Nordic Countries.-Episodes, Vol. 31, 29-34; Journal of International Geoscience (Beijing)
Bucher & Frey (1994): Petrogenesis of Metamorphic Rocks; -7th ed.; Edition. – Springer (Heidelberg)
CGI IWG (in review 2008): Simple Lithology vocabulary - Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/ConceptDefinitionsTG
CGI IWG (in review 2010): Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/GeoSciML/vocabulary/trunk/2010LithologyRevisions/SimpleLithology2010_rc.rdf
Faure Maure, et al. in press: Devonian Geodynamic Evolution of the Variscan Belt, Insights from the French Massif Central and Massif Armoricain. Tectonics (Washington DC), in press.
Fettes, D. & Desmons, J. (2007): Metamorphic Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks; Cambridge University Press (Cambridge).
Fry, N. (1984): The Field Description of Metamorphic Rocks.- John Wiley & Son Ltd (London)
Gillespie, M.R. & Styles, M.T. (1999): BGS Rock Classification Scheme, Volume 1, Classification of igneous rocks.; British Geological Survey (Nottingham)
Hallsworth, C.R. & Know, R. W, 'B (1999):BGS Rock Classification Scheme. Volume 3: Classification of sediments and sedimentary rocks.- British Geological Survey; Keyworth, Nottingham.
Koistinen, T., Stephens, M.B., Bogatchev, V., Nordgulen, O., Wennerström, M., Korhonen, J., 2001. Geological map of Fennoscandian Shield, scale 1:2 000 000. Geological Surveys of Finland, Norway and Sweden and the North-West Department of Natural Resources of Russia
LeMaitre, R.W. et al. (2002): Igneous Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission on the Systematics of Igneous Rocks ; 2nd Edition.- Cambridge University Press (Cambridge).
LINNEMANN, U (2003): The structuraL units of Saxo-Thuringia.- Geologia Saxonia 48/49, 19-28;
Matte, P. 2001: The Variscan collage and orogeny (480±290 Ma) and the tectonic definition of the Armorica microplate: a review, Terra Nova 13, 122-128
McKerrow, W.S. Mac Niocaill, C. & Dewey, J.F. 2002: The Caledonian Orogeny redefined, Journal of the Geological Society 157, pp. 1149-1154; London.
Murawski, H. & Meyer, W. (1998): Geologisches Wörterbuch; 10., neu bearb. und erw. Aufl. – Enke (Stuttgard).
Igneous material of the CGI Vocabulary 2008plus new required 1G-E terms
phaneritic_igneous_rock
igneous_material
basic_igneous_rock
acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock
ultramafic_igneous_rock
fine_grained_igneous_rock
pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock
foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotitepyroxenite
hornblendite
quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoidrhyolitoid
foidolite
foid_syenitoid
basalt
anorthosite
gabbroic_rock
syenitic_rock
tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt
dioritic_rock
tonalitegranitegranodiorite
rhyolite
gabbro
monzo_gabbro
foid_bearing_syenitesyenitequartz_syenitemonzonite
quartz_monzonite
…
new 1G-E terms
CGI Simple Lithology 200811
ultrabasic_igneous_rock
phaneritic_igneous_rock
ultramafic_igneous_rock
fine_grain_igneous_rock
foid_syenite
syenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotite
rhyolitoid
basalt
anorthosite
gabbroic_rock
monzo_gabbro
foid_bearing_syenite
quartz_syenite
quartz_monzonite
dioritoid
igneous_material
basic_igneous_rock
acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock
ultramafic_igneous_rock
fine_grained_igneous_rock
foid_dioritoid
foidolitefoid_monzosyenitefoid_syenitoid
pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock
gabbroid
pyroxenite
hornblendite
quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoid
… basalt…
foid_dioritefoid_monzodiorite
foid_bearing_anorthositequartz_anorthosite
monzogabbroic_rockalkali_feldspar_syenitic_rocksyenitic_rockmonzonitic_rockfoid_monzogabbrofoid_gabbro
tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt
alkali_feldspar_granitetonalitegranitegranodioritemonzodioritic_rockdioritic_rockalkali_feldspar_rhyoliterhyolite
…
gabbroquartz_gabbrofoid_bearing_gabbromonzo_gabbro
foid_bearing_syenitesyenitequartz_syenitemonzonite
quartz_monzonite
foid_bearing_monzonite
syenogranitemonzogranite…
…
…
1G-E vocabulary as part of the new Vocabulary of CGI (Simple Lithology 201001)
phaneritic_igneous_rock
foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotitepyroxenite
hornblendite
quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoidrhyolitoid
gabbroic_rock
syenite
dioritoid
…
igneous_material
basic_igneous_rock
acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock
foidolite
foid_syenitoid
pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock
anorthosite
syenitic_rock
tonalitegranitegranodiorite
dioritic_rock
gabbro
phaneritic_igneous_rock
ultramafic_igneous_rock
fine_grained_igneous_rock
foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotite
rhyolitoid
basalt
anorthosite
gabbroic_rock
tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt
rhyolite
monzo_gabbro
foid_bearing_syenite
quartz_syenitemonzonite
quartz_monzonite
dioritoid
proposed changes for definitions by 1G-E
new 1G-E terms
CGI Simple Lithology 200811
Example Arenite
Arenite (1G-E):Clastic sandstone that contains less than 10 percent matrix. Matrix is mud-size silicate
minerals (clay, feldspar, quartz, rock fragments, and alteration products) of detrital or diagenetic nature.
Pettijohn, Potter, Siever, 1972, Sand and Sandstone: New York, Springer Verlag, 681 p..
Arenite:A general name used for consolidated sedimentary rocks composed of sand-sized fragments
with a pure or nearly pure chemical cement and little or no interstitial matrix material ; e.g. sandstone, graywacke, arkose, calcarenite. The term is equivalent to the Greek-derived term psammite and was introduced as arenyte by Grabau (1904, p.242) who used it with appropriate prefixes in classifying medium-grained rocks (e.g. “autoarenyte”, “autocalcarenyte”, “hydraarenyte” and “hydrosilicarenyte”). See also lutite, rudite.
A “clean” sandstone that is well sorted, contains little or no matrix material, and has relatively simple mineralogic composition; specif. a pure or nearly pure, chemically cemented sandstone containing <10% argillaceous matrix (Williams et. al., 1954, p.290). The term is used for major category of sandstone, as distinguished from wacke.
Neuendorf et al. 2005, American Geological Institute Alexandria, Virginia 2005, 35 p..
Grain sizes
BGS grain‐size scheme (based on Wentworth, 1922)
ISO 14688‐1, Geotechnical investigation and testing – Identification and classification of soil – Part 1: Identification and description
SGF 18, Karlsson and Hansbo, 1992 Jordarternas indelning och benämning (3rd Ed.), Byggforskningsrådet, Stockholm (1992).
Aggregate name [grain‐size in mm]
Aggregate name [grain‐size in mm] Aggregate name [grain‐size in mm]
Coarse boulder 2000 ‐ …
Boulde
r
Medium boulder 600 ‐ 2000
Large Boulder 630 ‐ …
Coarse stone 200 ‐ 600
Boulder 200 – 630 Ston
e
Medium stone 60 ‐ 200
Boulders 256 ‐ …
Cobble 63 – 200
Cobbles 64 ‐ 256 Coarse gravel 20 ‐ 63 Coarse Gravel 20 ‐ 60
Pebbles 4 ‐ 64 Medium gravel 6,3 ‐ 20 Medium gravel 6 ‐ 20
Gravel
Granules 2 ‐ 4 Gravel
Fine gravel 2,0 ‐ 6,3
Gravel
Fine gravel 2 ‐ 6
Very‐coarse sand
1 ‐ 2
Coarse sand 0,5 ‐ 1 Coarse sand 0,63 ‐2,0 Coarse sand 0,6 ‐ 2
Medium sand 0,25 ‐ 0,5 Medium sand 0,2 ‐ 0,63 Medium sand 0,2‐ 0,6
Fine sand 0,125 ‐ 0,25
Sand
Fine sand 0,063 ‐ 0,2
Sand
Fine sand 0,06 ‐ 0,2
Sand
Very fine sand 0,032 ‐ 0,125 Silt 0,004 ‐ 0,032 Coarse silt 0,02 ‐ 0,063 Coarse silt 0,02 ‐ 0,06
Medium silt 0,0063 ‐ 0,02 Medium silt 0,006 ‐ 0,02
Silt
Fine silt 0,002 ‐ 0,0063 Silt
Fine silt 0,002 ‐ 0,006 Mud
Clay … ‐ 0,004 Clay … ‐ 0,002 Clay … ‐ 0,002