14

An Introduction to Conditional Simulation

[W]hile the real surface z0 (x) is known only at a limited number of locations xi , . . . the simulated surface can be
known at almost every point x of the deposit. It is then possible to apply to the simulation the various processes
of extraction, hauling, stockpiling, etc., to study their technical and economic consequences and by feedback to
correct these processes. (Journel, 1974, p. 673).

having the same general statistical character as the

Two- and three-dimensional arrays of values,
having the same statistical and spatial charac-
teristics as grades of a mineral deposit or do-
main, are becoming increasingly useful in the
design of advanced exploration/evaluation pro-
grams, as well as in mine and mill planning at
the feasibility and operating stages. Chapter 14
provides insight into the development of arrays
of conditionally simulated values and their use
specifically for purposes related to improving the
quality of resource/reserve estimation.
14.1: INTRODUCTION
Simulation in a mining context means imitation of
conditions. Simulation, as it relates specifically to es-
timation, generally involves an attempt to create an
array of values that has the same statistical and spa-
tial characteristics as the true grades; however, values
are generated on a much more local scale than that for
which true grade information is available. Although
reference here is restricted to grade, other variables
can be simulated. A simulation is not an estimate;
it is rather a two- or three-dimensional set of values
original data.
It is important to realize why simulations are nec-
essary when both data and estimates exist. The reason
is best illustrated in a simple diagram showing grade
profiles across a mineralized zone (Fig. 14.1). True,
local fluctuations in the spatial distribution of grade
are smoothed by most estimation methods, such that
estimates do not reflect the local grade variations. In
two dimensions, one can imagine a complex surface
that represents the true grade distribution and a much
smoother surface that represents the distribution of
estimates. Simulated arrays of values are constructed
to vary on the same scale as the true variations of
sample grades. In estimation, we are concerned with
minimizing the error variance; in simulations, we are
concerned with reproducing the dispersion variance
of the real data.
Simulation procedures can be designed that repro-
duce histograms of any shape (e.g., Agterberg, 1974),
including normal, lognormal, and three-parameter
lognormal distributions. In the simplest case (a single
process), the procedures simply involve random
draws from a defined population. In more compli-
cated cases, several random processes can contribute
to a final distribution. Such simulations have limited

284

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
 AN INTRODUCTION TO CONDITIONAL SIMULATION
30
Values
25
20
Conditioning data
15
Distance
Figure 14.1: A comparison of idealized profiles of true grade
(solid line), simulated grade (dashed line), and kriged es-
timated grade (dotted line) on a common profile. Note the
similar variability of the true and simulated grades in con-
trast to the smoothed pattern of estimated grades. All pro-
files pass through the known data points. Redrawn from
Journel (1975).
application in a mining context because they do
not take into account the spatial characteristics of
the variable under study. Simulated data arrays that
retain the same density distribution (histogram) and
autocorrelation character and that are linked spatially
to reproduce the existing data are called conditional
simulations. Conditional simulations are the type
normally used for applications involving ore/waste
grades. A conditional simulation and reality can be
considered realizations of the same random function.
Journel (1975) states, “Reality and simulation can be
considered as two variants of the same mineralized
phenomenon” (p. 8).
14.2: AIMS OF SIMULATION
Simulations serve a variety of purposes in the mineral
industry, including (see Journel, 1979) the following:
(i) Study of grade continuity (e.g., Nowak et al.,
1993)
(ii) Optimizing sampling plans for advanced explo-
ration
(iii) Evaluation of resource/reserve estimation meth-
ods (e.g., Dowd and David, 1976)
(iv) Mine planning (e.g., Blackwell et al., 1999)
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
285
(v) Mill optimization (e.g., Journel and Isaaks,
1984)
(vi) Financial risk analysis (e.g., Ravenscroft, 1992;
Rossi, 1999)
(vii) Any combination of the purposes listed here.
Here, emphasis is placed on the use of conditional
simulations for characterizing grade continuity and
as a means of evaluating estimation methods.
Simulations produce values at the nodes of an ex-
tremely fine grid (i.e., very closely spaced nodes rel-
ative to the distance separating the conditioning data)
such that the character of a simulated deposit or do-
main is almost perfectly known by a large set of punc-
tual values. These are the values used for the various
purposes listed previously. Because so many punctual
values can be simulated within blocks of a practical
size (e.g., selective mining unit [SMU]), the average
of all simulated values within a block can be taken as
a close estimate of the true average value of the block.
This opens the way for a number of practical appli-
cations of simulations (e.g., a mining sequence can
be imposed on the blocks based on estimated grades
to determine the true impact of production on such
procedures as ore/waste selection, haulage schedul-
ing, stockpiling, blending, and mill efficiency. Here,
emphasis is directed to simulations as they relate di-
rectly to the problem of obtaining high-quality block
estimates in a production scenario.
Various estimation methods can be applied to
blocks whose simulated true grades are known. Es-
timates by each method can be compared with true
block grades and the best method selected for use
in practice. When complex data distributions occur, it
has become common to use multiple indicator kriging
to obtain grade estimates. One of the necessary steps
in this procedure involves a change of support opera-
tion (see Chapter 12) that derives a block-grade distri-
bution from a sample-grade distribution. Simulations
can provide examples of the types of block-grade dis-
tributions that are encountered in practice that can be
compared with distributions obtained by change of
support procedures; simulations can also be used to
verify change of support procedures (e.g., Rossi and
 286 APPLIED MINERAL INVENTOR Y ESTIMATION
Parker, 1994). An important but little-used applica-
tion of simulation involves an understanding of the
spatial distribution of grade subpopulations (i.e., sim-
ulations of the pattern of physical continuity in space
of various grade populations).
14.3: CONDITIONAL SIMULATION AS AN
ESTIMATION PROCEDURE
In certain respects, a simulated value is an estimate
of the true value at the site of the simulation. How-
ever, the simulated value is not a best estimate, and
the related estimation error is twice that of the cor-
responding kriging error. Consequently, conditional
simulation has not been viewed as a reliable or ac-
cepted estimation procedure. Of course, simulation
and estimation have different purposes. Simulation
allows local variations in values of a variable to be
examined, particularly with regard to what impact
these local variations have on sampling plans, estima-
tion procedures, mine and mill planning, and financial
matters. Estimates, however, are made ultimately for
the purpose of identifying ore and waste on a scale
that physical separation can be achieved.
There has been a trend toward the use of condi-
tional simulations as a realistic approach to estima-
tion, particularly for grade control during production
(e.g., Blackwell et al., 1999). The general procedure
involves the production of n simulations (for exam-
ple, 10) of the same locations in space. The 10 values
simulated at each point define the probability distri-
bution for the grade at that point. These distributions
can be used in a variety of ways (e.g., to estimate the
probability that grade is above a cutoff at a point). Al-
ternatively, all such distributions in a specified block
can be combined to estimate the grade of the block
or to estimate the probability that the block grade is
above a cutoff grade.
14.4: A GEOSTATISTICAL PERSPECTIVE
Consider a single point, x, among many in space. This
point has a real value of z 0 (x) and a kriged value of
z k∗ (x) such that
z 0 (x) = z k∗ (x) + [z 0 (x) − z k∗ (x)].
(kriging error)
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
The expected value of this kriging error is zero. Now
consider a random function Z 0 (x) independent of z(x)
but isomorphic (having similar structure) to it. That
is, Z s (x) has the same covariance C(h), as Z (x).
Then the same kriging procedure leads to a com-
parable result (i.e., or any sampling of the random
function):
∗ ∗
Z s (x) = Z sk (x) + [Z s (x) − Z sk (x)].
Because Eqs. 14.1 and 14.2 are isomorphic equiva-
lents (realizations of the same random function), it is
possible to mix components on their right sides to pro-
duce a new realization of the same random function,
as follows:
Z c (x) = z k∗ (x) + [Z s (x) − Z sk
∗
(x)]
where Z c (x) is constructed by combining the residuals
of the second random function Z s (x) with the kriging
Z k∗ (x) of the initial random function.
Thus, simulation can be seen to be the addition of a
simulated-error factor to a kriged value. Hence, krig-
ing is a product of the overall simulation procedure.
Equation 14.3 also demonstrates that the simulation is
conditional on the original data (i.e., reproduces the
original data) because, for the conditioning sample
sites, kriging reproduces the sample value, and the
error term disappears.
14.5: SEQUENTIAL GAUSSIAN
SIMULATION
Of the several simulation procedures in use (e.g., turn-
ing bands, LU decomposition, sequential Gaussian),
only the sequential Gaussian procedure is considered
here. The method is based on the principal that an ap-
propriate simulation of a point is a value drawn from
its conditional distribution given the values at some
nearest points. The sequential nature rests on the fact
that subsequent points that are simulated make use
not only of the nearby original conditioning data, but
also the nearby previously simulated values. Software
for this purpose is readily available in Deutsch and
 AN INTRODUCTION TO CONDITIONAL SIMULATION
Journel (1998). The general procedure is as follows:
(i) Select a set of conditioning data.
(ii) Transform conditioning data to equivalent nor-
mal scores.
(iii) Develop a semivariogram model for the trans-
formed data.
(iv) Check transformed data for bivariate normal-
ity by comparing sample indicator semivari-
ograms for different thresholds (lower quartile,
median, upper quartile) to a theoretical bivariate
model.
(v) Proceed with sequential Gaussian simulation
routine (from Deutsch and Journel, 1998).
(vi) Conduct several checks to demonstrate that sim-
ulation has honored the desired constraints.
It is important to compare a histogram of the sim-
ulated values with a histogram of the conditioning
data and compare experimental semivariograms of the
simulated values with the semivariogram model de-
termined for the normal scores of the conditioning
data. A contour plot of the simulated values is also
useful for comparison with a contoured plot of the
conditioning data.
14.6: SIMULATING GRADE CONTINUITY
There are many practical mineral exploration pro-
grams in which the physical continuity of ore-bearing
rock is less than the spacing between drill sections
that form the basis of data collection. In this situ-
ation, a particular mineralized structure intersected
on one drill section is not represented on adjoin-
ing drill sections (e.g., Fig. 3.10). The Shasta ep-
ithermal precious-metal deposit (see Section 3.5.2)
is such an example. In this case, the lengths of
many of the mineralized quartz veins within an al-
tered zone are much less than the spacing between
drill sections. Hence, information from drill sections
is not a sound basis for interpolation of grade be-
tween sections. Two horizontal and vertical simula-
tions (Nowak et al., 1993) clearly indicate the scale on
which additional data are required in order to provide
data that can be used to interpolate with confidence
(Fig. 3.11).
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
287
This general situation (widely spaced data sites
relative to the average physical continuity of local
ore-bearing structures) is common to many deposits;
in particular, shear-controlled deposits such as many
gold-bearing shear veins. When the exploration of
such deposits has advanced to a stage that includes
underground workings (raises and drifts within the
structure) in addition to widely spaced piercement
by diamond-drill holes, information can be collected
to construct a semivariogram model for gold grade
or accumulation and thickness. Underground access
provides the database with which to construct a semi-
variogram model; diamond-drill intersections pro-
vide the conditioning data with which to develop
simulations.
14.7: SIMULATION TO TEST VARIOUS
ESTIMATION METHODS
14.7.1: Introduction
A set of 302 Cu grades of blasthole cuttings for a part
of one bench (bench height = 40 ft) of the Similka-
meen porphyry copper deposit (cf. Raymond, 1979)
is used as an example of the use of conditional simula-
tion to compare the effectiveness of various estimation
methods. These data are largely at a spacing of 20 to
25 ft. The aim of the study is twofold:
(i) To produce a closely spaced two-dimensional ar-
ray of values with the same mean, standard de-
viation, and spatial structure as the original data
(ii) To test various block estimation techniques
(nearest neighbor, inverse distance weighting,
ordinary kriging) that use the original data to
estimate 45 × 45 × 30 ft3 blocks whose mean
grades are known (average of all contained sim-
ulated values).
14.7.2: Procedure
A sequential Gaussian method of conditional simula-
tion was selected for illustrative purposes (see Section
14.4) using software from the widely available GSLIB
software package (Deutsch and Journel, 1998). In
 288 APPLIED MINERAL INVENTOR Y ESTIMATION

(vii) Repeat steps (v) and (vi) for as many additional

simulations as are required.
3600
The test program reported here, based on Similka-
meen blasthole Cu grades as conditioning data, in-
volved 10 independent simulations.
3500
Northing (ft)

14.7.3: Verifying Results of the

Simulation Process
3400
Histograms of the conditioning data and the simulated
values are compared in Fig. 14.5. It is evident both
from the forms of the two histograms and from the
3300 accompanying means and standard deviations that the
simulation process has faithfully reproduced the basic
statistical character of the conditioning data. The con-
toured plot of the simulated values (Fig. 14.6) shows
4400 4500 4600 4700

Easting (ft) 15

≥ 0.951 0.195–0.361 35

0.639–0.951 0.090–0.195

t
0.361–0.639 < 0.090 50

0f
16
Figure 14.2: Contours for 302 blasthole Cu values (Sim-
ilkameen deposit). Data locations are omitted for clarity
but values are more or less uniformly distributed over the
field, with a general spacing of about 20 to 25 ft. Contours
demonstrate a preferential trend in a roughly northeasterly 80
40

direction.
25

brief, the simulation procedure involves the follow- 11 105

0f
ing steps: t

125
(i) Select a specific area for which the simulation
will be performed (Fig. 14.2). 140

(ii) Transform the original 302 data to a normal dis-

tribution using a generalized normal transform
(e.g., Journel and Huijbregts, 1979).
(iii) Determine a semivariogram model for the trans-
formed data (Figs. 14.3 and 14.4 and Table 14.1).
(iv) Check for bivariate normality (Fig. 14.4).
(v) Conduct sequential Gaussian simulation of
18,000 points using the SGSIM program
(Deutsch and Journel, 1998).
(vi) Check the validity of the resulting simulation.
170
Figure 14.3: Pictorial summary of the semivariogram model
derived for normal score transforms of the 302 blasthole Cu
grades (conditioning data) representing a part of one bench
(bench height = 30 ft) of the Similkameen porphyry copper
deposit. The two ellipses represent anisotropic ranges of
two structures. The radii shown are those used to construct
experimental semivariograms to develop the model. The
model differs slightly from that obtained using the entire
1,181 blastholes for the bench.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
 AN INTRODUCTION TO CONDITIONAL SIMULATION 289

Table 14.1 Two-dimensional semivariogram model a

for 302 blasthole copper values, Similkameen N = 302
Mean = 0.4762
porphyry-copper deposit, Princeton, British Std. Dev. = 0.3824

Columbia 0.12

Frequency (%)
Structure Range (ft)a C Anisotropy ratio
0.08
Nugget 0 0.3 1
Spherical 1 40 0.4 0.625
Spherical 2 160 0.3 0.688 0.04

Note: a The indicated longest range is along a 035

azimuth. 0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0

Cu (%)
the same general character as the contoured condi-
b
tioning data (Fig. 14.2), except, as anticipated, the 0.16
N = 18000
relatively few and more widely spaced conditioning Mean = 0.4720
Std. Dev. = 0.3868
data are incapable of showing the local detail con-
0.12
tained in the simulated values. A more formal test Frequency (%)
of the similarity of spatial character is illustrated by
a comparison of the experimental semivariogram of 0.08
the simulated values with the semivariogram model
that characterizes the conditioning data. Figure 14.7
clearly demonstrates that the model for the condition- 0.04

ing data could just as well serve as a model for the

experimental semivariogram of the simulated values.
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0

Cu (%)
0.3
Figure 14.5: Histograms for (a) 302 blasthole Cu values
(conditioning data) and (b) 18,000 simulated Cu values,
Similkameen porphyry copper deposit. Note the similarity
0.2 of the two histograms.
γ (h)

Clearly, this simulation has been successful in re-

producing the statistical and spatial character of the
0.1
conditioning data.

14.7.4: Application of Simulated Values

0.0
0 40 80 120 160 200 As a practical application of the simulated values gen-
Sample Spacing (h) erated for part of one level of the Similkameen por-
Figure 14.4: A check for bivariate normality. Dots are an ex- phyry copper deposit, consider their use as a standard
perimental indicator semivariogram for the 302 condition- against which to measure the effectiveness of vari-
ing data using a cutoff grade of 0.385 percent Cu (median
ous estimation procedures. A 45 × 45 ft2 grid is su-
grade). The smooth curve is a fit by a Gaussian theoretical
model calculated using normal scores for the 302 condi- perimposed on the 360 × 450 ft2 field (Fig. 14.2) of
tioning data. This example for an azimuth of 125 degrees simulated values (recall that the values represent
is typical of the fits obtained. blasthole assays for a bench height of 40 ft). Each

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
 290 APPLIED MINERAL INVENTOR Y ESTIMATION

Table 14.2 Parameters for traditional least-squares linear models describing estimates versus true block
values, Similkameen test

Estimation method Correlation coefficient y Intercepta Slopea Scatter

Ordinary kriging 0.894 0.0999 (0.0791) 0.818 (0.151) 0.0951

1/d 2 0.819 0.0304 (0.0320) 0.941 (0.0604) 0.1093
1/d 3 0.754 −0.0994 (0.0480) 1.229 (0.0902) 0.1677
n = 80

a
Bracketed number is one standard deviation error.

cell (block) of the resulting array of 80 cells (8 × 10)
is then estimated by several methods; in this case,
nearest neighbor, various inverse-distance weighting
procedures, and ordinary kriging using only the origi-
nal data. The true value of each block is taken to be the
average of all simulated points within the block. In-
dividual estimation techniques can then be compared
3600
against these true values on an x–y plot. Because the
expectation is for unbiased results with each estima-
tion technique, on average, producing the correct re-
sult, the data on x–y plots can be approximated by a
linear model. Three examples are shown in Fig. 14.8
for ordinary kriging, inverse-distance weighting –
exponent 2; and inverse-distance weighting – expo-
nent 3. Statistical and linear model parameters are
summarized in Table 14.2.
This test demonstrates the relative quality of
various estimation methods as applied to an ideal-
ized array of block values generated from a parent
population with statistical and spatial characteristics

3500 1.2
Northing (ft)

1.0

3400 0.8
γ (h)

0.6

3300 0.4

0.2

0.0
4400 4500 4600 4700 0 50 100 150 200

Easting (ft) Sample Spacing, h (ft)

≥ 0.951 0.195–0.361 Figure 14.7: Comparison of the semivariogram model for
0.639–0.951 0.090–0.195
302 blasthole Cu values (smooth solid line) and the ex-
perimental semivariogram for the 18,000 simulated values
0.361–0.639 < 0.090
(dotted, irregular line). Note that the model based on the
Figure 14.6: Contoured plot for 18,000 simulated Cu val- conditioning data could serve equally well for the simulated
ues for the same area shown in Fig. 14.2. data.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
 AN INTRODUCTION TO CONDITIONAL SIMULATION 291

a
b
1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
Cu (%)

Cu (%)
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Cu (%) Cu (%)

1.50

1.25

1.00
Cu (%)

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Cu (%)

Figure 14.8: Examples of block estimates by various estimation methods versus true block grades. (a) Ordinary kriging
estimates versus true block grades (x axis) (b) Inverse squared distance estimates versus true block grades. (c) Inverse
cubed distance estimates versus true block grades. Filled squares are individual 45 × 45 × 30 ft3 blocks. Linear models
are traditional least-squares fits, with error entirely in the ordinate (i.e., the y axis, which represents the estimation method).
Parameters for the linear models are listed in Table 14.2.

comparable to those of a part of the Similkameen bias (slope) and scatter of values (error) are greatest
porphyry copper deposit. In particular, kriging and for 1/d 3 . The choice between kriging and 1/d 2 is not
1/d 2 are clearly better than 1/d 3 , as indicated by the so clear, although, statistics aside, the kriging results
statistics in Table 14.2. Specifically, the conditional show much less scatter than do the1/d 2 results.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
 292 APPLIED MINERAL INVENTOR Y ESTIMATION
14.7.5: Sequential Indicator Simulation
Another method also available in Deutsch and Journel
(1998) is sequential (multiple) indicator simulation
(SISIM). This does not require a Gaussian distribu-
tion of the data and uses multiple indicator kriging,
as described in Section 10.11.2, to model complex
grade distribution patterns. The general procedure is
as follows:
(i) Select a set of conditioning data.
(ii) Select a set of cutoff (threshold) grades and trans-
form to a set of indicator (0 or 1) data.
(iii) Develop semivariogram models for the various
sets of indicator-transformed data.
(iv) Proceed with the simulation routine (from
Deutsch and Journel, 1998).
(v) Conduct several checks to demonstrate that the
simulation has honored the desired constraints.
In this case, the simulation routine randomly se-
lects blocks for multiple indicator kriging (MIK) us-
ing the original data and any nearby blocks already
simulated. A random number (0 to 1) is selected and
applied to the MIK probability of being between two
of the specified thresholds. The grade is interpreted
linearly between the two threshold grades defined by
the random number selected.
14.8: PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. To be useful in the mineral industry, most simu-
lations of grade distributions must be conditional
(i.e., in addition to reproducing the mean and dis-
persion of the original data, the simulated values
must also reproduce the spatial characteristics of
the original data).
2. Generating a conditional simulation is a nontriv-
ial undertaking that requires a reasonable level of
geostatistical sophistication. Software to conduct
conditional simulations is readily available (e.g.,
Deustch and Journel, 1998), but its implementa-
tion requires a fundamental understanding of a
range of geostatistical procedures.
3. Conditional simulation is far more warranted than
the limited practical applications in the technical
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
literature would suggest. Most reported practical
applications relate to production scenarios, but
substantial scope for the use of conditional simu-
lations exists prior to exploitation at the advanc-
ed exploration and feasibility stages of deposit
development.
4. When detailed semivariogram models are ob-
tained confidently by the judicious collecting of
data early in an exploration program, conditional
simulation can provide remarkable insight into
grade continuity and how continuity can influ-
ence the development of an adequate sampling
program, especially as regards sample spacing.
14.9: SELECTED READING
Deutsch, C., and A. Journel, 1998, GSLIB, Geosta-
tistical software library and user’s guide; Oxford
University Press, New York, 369 pp.
Journel, A. G., 1979, Geostatistical simulation: meth-
ods for exploration and mine planning; Eng. Min.
Jour., December, pp. 86–91.
Journel, A. G., and E. H. Izaaks, 1984, Conditional in-
dicator simulation: application to a Saskatchewan
uranium deposit; Math. Geol., v. 16, no. 7,
pp. 685–718.
14.10: EXERCISES
1. Simulate a grade profile of 20 5-m composites.
The mean grade is 2.3 g/t and the standard devia-
tion is 3.1 g/t. Assume a lognormal distribution.
Step 1: Calculate the mean logarithmic value m l
and the logarithmic variance sl2 from the
arithmetic data provided, using equations in
Chapter 4.
Step 2: Draw 20 values from a table of random z
scores for a normal distribution (e.g., from a
mathematics handbook).
Step 3: Transform each randomly selected z score
into a corresponding logarithmic value us-
ing the relation z = (x − m)/s (i.e., x =
zsl + m l ).
Step 4: Plot the profile of 20 successive x values
 AN INTRODUCTION TO CONDITIONAL SIMULATION
at sites 0 to 19, inclusive. Note that this pro-
cedure produces a profile of a variable with a
pure nugget effect.
2. Assume that at sites 0, 9, and 19 in Question 1, the
values are known (and are to be used to condition
the remaining values). The deposit is known to
have alternating high- and low-grade zones on a
scale of 40 to 50 m. In this example, conditioning
means that the position of intermediate samples
relative to a line joining two random end points
that coincide with conditioning sites is maintained
relative to a line joining the two conditioning
points.
Suppose the random values for Sites 0 and 9
are 1.8 and 3.1, respectively, and the known values
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Warwick, on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:25:17, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545993.015
293
at these sites are 1.2 and 4.1, respectively. Sup-
pose further that a random value at Site 2 is 1.1.
The conditioned value at Site 2 is determined as
follows. A line based on the two random points
has the equation y = 1.8 + (3.1 − 1.8) × /9.
For site x = 2, the corresponding line value of y is
2.1 (1.0 higher than the random value of 1.1). This
difference must be maintained relative to a line
through the two known conditioning points. The
equation for the conditioning line is y  = 1.2 +
2.9 × /9 which, for site x = 2, gives y  = 1.84.
The conditioned value for Site 2 must be 1.0 lower
than this point on the conditioning line; hence, the
conditioned value at Site 2 is 1.84 − 1.0 = 0.84.
Produce a profile of conditioned values from the
randomly selected values of Question 1.