Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Nordlund 1996 - JSR

    Uploaded by

    rajaimportantdocuments
    8 views10 pages
    research paper

    Original Title

    Nordlund 1996_JSR

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    research paper

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    8 views10 pages

    Nordlund 1996 - JSR

    Uploaded by

    rajaimportantdocuments
    research paper

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 10
    FORMALIZING GEOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE—WITH AN EXAMPLE OF MOD! ANG STRATIGRAPHY USING FUZZY LOGIC ULF NORDLUND Insite of Earth Scenes, Paleontology and Mistorial Geology, Uppsala Univer, Nor. 22. 75236 Uppal, Sede: nal: wlémoralnd@ pase Anstaacr: This paper examines the potential of using methods de Fived from fuzzy set theory to utilize qualitative geological data in numerical modeling. An example application involving dynamic strat ‘graphic modeling is used to deseribe the basic design and function of ‘simple fuzzy system. Preliminary results, as well as advantages and limitations of a fuzzy approach to the problem of controlling sediment distribution in space and time, are discussed with reference tothe ex- ample application. The potential of fuzzy logic in geological classifi cation and prediction are briefly discussed, as are aspects onthe r0- boustness and objctiveness of fuzzy methods. The main coneusion is that, due to their ability to handle qualitative data and complex non- linear relationships, furzy-logi-related methods are very well suited for using qualitative geological data in numerical models. Aibough the basic ideas are not new, fuz2y logic as itis known today is a relatively young branch of mathematical logic formally defined in the 1960s by Lai Zadeh (Zadeh 1965). Fuzzy logic is often, together with neural networks and genetic algorithms. referred to a8 oe ofthe ew A titcialinteligence techniques. Fuzzy logic bas found numerous applications, mainly in the areas of process control and expert systems. Geological applications are sill scarce, however, Those that have been published mainly concern (exploration) geopiysics and geotechnical engineering (2, Grifiths 1987; Kacewicz 1987, 1989; Popol and Mendel 1986: Fang and Chen 1990; Lashgari 1991 aang etal. 1992 ‘The methods of fuzzy logic allow for quanificaton of qualitative data and modeling of complex nonlinear relationstips and systems involving ‘nonrandom uncersiny. Geology is vo a high depree a deseripive science. and the majority of geological data are qualitative, Considering this, an considering also that geological systems, Ike most natural systems, ae complex and often dificult to model mathematically, it appears as if fuzzy logic may be paiculrly useful to geologists. Tn tis pape, I show Some ofthe advantages in using 2 fuzzy approach to problems tht involve “sof” qualitative data. Using an example in volving stratigraphic modeling aplication, te basic design ad function of a Simple fuzey system is described. Some ofthe pros and cons of a fuzzy approach to geological modeling, prediction, and classification are pointed ou. The main conclusion of the paper is that fuzzy methods ae indeed very useful tools for using qualitative geological data in mathe ‘matical models ‘An flor has been made to keep this paper as “nonmathematcal” as possible. Exhaustive accounts forthe mathematics of fuzzy logic are avail, able elewbere(eg.. Yager and Filey 1994; Kosko 1992), STRATIGRAPHIC MODELING In recent years, computer maelng of stratigraphy has become increas ‘ingly popula. partly because of the rapid development in computer tech ‘ology but most Because stratigraphic modeling increases our understand {ing of how sediment dsiibution varies through ime in response to extemal factors such aseustasy and tectonics. Apart from a purely academic interest, dynamic statigraphic modeling also has economic significance, mainly in hydrocarbon exploration and preducton and in groundwvater and conta ‘nan-transport modeling. owns oF Siam REAR, VoL. 66, NO, 4, JY, 1996, 689-698 Cop © 198, SEPM Saxe fer Setientry Gog) 10T-;XDU86 50.0 In stratigraphic simulations, several processes are modeled simulaneous- ly in space and time, Apurt from deposition ard erosion, these usually include tectonic movement, se-level changes, compaction, and isostatic compensation, Although many of these ae easily formalized using con ventional mathematics, the modeling of sediment distibution, (ie, the changing pattems of deposition snd erosion on surfaces over which com- diuons vary considerably) is often very dificult. It involves handing not only several interdependent and complex parameters (eg. currents and ‘wave action), but also parameters that cannot be rail formalized (surface ‘morphology or “'shape). The problem of formalization is frustrating be cause usually some qualitative information is available but in a foem that oes not allow for direct numerical treatment. Such “sof”, qualitative ‘knowledge may be represented by statements like: “Beach sediments are often coarser than those deposited farther seaward at greater depths”, or ‘Reef growth requires a warm climate, limited clasic sedimentation, goad circulation, and depths generally within the phexic zone”. These slaements certainly contain information, bat how can ths be quantified and put 10 use in, for instance, stratigraphic simulations? Can tems such as “warm, lima” of good etculacion” be represened by numbers? To investigate whether methods related to forzy logic can be used 10 solve this kind of problem, an experimental modeling program was con structed atthe Insite of Earth Sciences at Uppsala (Nordlund and Silf- versparre 1994). The program, which is capable of simulating the sedi mentological development of an ocean margin in space and time, i aher conventional in all respects but one: erosion and deposition is controlled by a se of fuzzy logic rules (a fuzzy system) instead of set of mathe, atic equations. Initial reas ae promising. Not only is it possible to include qualitative ata and to model complex relationships among these, but the fuzay ap proach also allows fora high degree of fexibiliy and a very appealing iniive"™ way of building models. The computer program, witen for the Maciazosh,is avilable from the auhoe upon eeques. Fury Lacie A fuzzy system i a set of logic rules using fuzzy ses with imprecise boundaries instead of conventional sets wit precise boundaries in premises and conclusions. The design and function of a simple fuzzy system is presented inthis setion using the stratigraphic modeling application as an example, Fuzzy Sets Fuzzy li is bse nthe concep of fc ses ath 1965). A fay set has uy or inprece unde, in ora othe nai ofp conventions se. Ths mean that objets can be paral members of mare than ove fy st Ina chp se, one (1.0) indices ill embers, whereas zero (0.0) ints no membership Foc fz ss, membeohp Can ao be represented by the factional numbers betmen 20 an on gue | 8 grapicaleresenaton afte dferencesberwee ip and any stl some ofthe avanags in sng iy eather tha 2 csp definition, Using rsp lsifeion (Fig 1A) grain wth a ameter of 1.999 tum i esd as “sand, whereas ¢ grain of ameter 20001 mm be Tangs to ravel” This i bveusly mot saisfacy. Soh a gid ese fcaton dos not conespond to our cone ation of onium be 0 tL cetant> —_ and , oa depree of about (05. Cassificacon using fuzzy sts thus beter reflecs our ides of the con vinyous variable of grain sie. ‘The membership funcions for a numberof fuzzy sts potently useful for sedimentation modeling ave shown in Figure 2A. Fuzzy ses are context dependent. concept such 35 shallow” has differen meaning in different situation, asin a “shallow” swimming pool vs. a “sallow” shel. In ‘modeling an ocean marga, the fuzzy set is probably very true (membership values = 1) from zero up to tenor twenty meters of water ‘depth, whereas farther down it becomes less ue with increasing depth membership values approaching zero). At ca. 200-300 ra, is definitely false (membership valves ~ 0), In Figure 2B, a graphical rep- resentation of th values over a modeled depositional surface are shown foe the two fuzzy sets and (cf. Fig 2A) Crisp sts are special cases of fuzzy ses, For example the set in Figure 2A is crisp set, Not all terms or concepts need necessarily to be described as fuzzy. Some, such as , may be beter represented by a erisp or nearly ersp set. F NORDLUND The membership function forthe complement of @fuzey st is simply the membership cur tumed upside down, The membership functions for the sets NOT sallow’> and are shown with dished lines in Figure 28. The disribuion of uth values for the ccomplemerts af the fuzzy sets in Figure 2B could thus be visualized by simply reversing the color ramps inthe plots. Complementary fuzzy sets ray have significance and uly. They may. for instance, be equivalent 0 terms considered opposites of those erigitally defined. In the case of “, the complementary set could be considered equivalent 0 the ‘coeept "deep Fuzzy sets can be combined using conventional lopic operators suchas AND (Conjunction, or intersection), and OR (disjunction, or union). The raphical representation of the disjunction and conjunction of the sets “shallow > and is shown in Figure 2. Finding the conjunction (AND) involve selecting the lower ruth value forthe two sets involved, whereas for dsjunetion (OR), the higher value is chosen, If the depth at a certin point is 5 m and the distance to the river mouth is 5K 1 is this point “shallow and fur from the soure'"? The truth value for 35 m with respost to the fuzzy set is 0.85 but a distance of 5000 m is 0.3 in the fuzzy set (Fig. 34). The ‘and implies cogjuncton, in which both pans of the premise, and have to be tre in order forthe whole expression tobe tre. This means choosing the lower ofthe derived values, which in aur example i 0.3, Thus, the poi is "shallow and far from source” to a degree of 0.3. Similarly, the point i shallow or far from source” 10 a degree of O85 since the “or” implies disjunction, which ‘means chat either one of the two conditions in the premise should be rue inorder forthe conclusion to be also true. Thus we chose the higher of the truth values (0.85). Fuzzy ses defined on domain variables such as depth and distance (C0 source, oF 10 shore) are useful as input to sedimentary model. Other poteaially useful input variables are local morphology (c-, degree of ceneavity-convexity, slope), accommodation change, and degree of expo- sure to ooean-derived energy. Posible oupur sets may be based on grain sae, sediment compasition (eg, clay sand rato), nd amount Multidimensional Fuzzy Sets.—In this paper, we are dealing only with ‘one-dimensional Fuzzy sets, in which sets ae defined on one domain vari able (such depth or distance) Fuzzy sets can, however, also be mult Cc < shallow AND far_from_source > < shallow OR far_trom_source > Ec. 2—A) Disgam shoving meer anton for fuzzy set based on the dni ribs depth eft gram) a distance o sure ght agra). Te cares foo oftte ses, sallow and ard ) ‘a drawn wth dived ies. B) The dstbuton of ah ais forthe sets and . So, ia person dispays an apple and aks: “sth ‘an apple?” most people would answer "Yes". Ifthe person chews a bite from the apple and repeats tbe question, the answer would most likely sill be "Yes", But what happens ifthe person keeps on eating so tha, nthe ‘end, ony th core of the apple remains? Is it still an apple? Most would (0, The question then becomes: When di it pas from being an aple (belonging othe set ) «a aon-apple (belonging 1 the complementary set )? Although we at all times have all the facts aout the apple—its shape, its size is weight, ete —and although we cen measure the change in these parameters with any precision, we sil cannot say exactly when i ceased to be an apple. Obviously the problem cannot be solved using statistics, since the uncertainty involved is noncan- dom (chance isnot involved) If we instead assume that the person withthe apple olds it beind his back, and asks: Do Ihave the apple in my right ot my left and” then chance is inded invclved and we havea random: uncetainty (p = 0 for either hand), Facey Rules A fuczy rade is 4 logical expression in which the lefchand side, the premise, consis of fuzzy sets combined by logic operators (ANDIOR), and the righthand side contain a conclusion, The conclusion may be fuzzy sels such as , , , or erode a itle>. These ses refer tothe type and amount of sediment that should be deposited ce eroded. An example of a complete fuzzy rule ist . The truth value derived from the combined sets inthe premise (Fi. 3A) i the ‘wut value of the conclusion. This rule, given te values of 35 m and S000 im for depth and distance respectively results inthe conclusion being true to a degree of 0.3, We cannot us this value directly, however, Instead, we we itt0 modify the membership futon ofthe conusion st. Two of the ULF NORDLUND ‘most popular ways of doing this ae shown graphically in Figure 38. Both result inthe highest value ofthe modified membership function becoming ‘qual to the truth value This means tat the conclusion cam never be more ue than the tath ofthe premise [Nate how similar a logical expression such as the one ahove, , is tothe nguisic expressions we use when communicating geological information verbally or in witng (See also Griffiths 1990), This luseaes the important pot that fuzzy loge allows us to formalize qualitative statements, making it possible to use them in applications narmally reserved for quantitative data A Fuzy System A fucy system consis of ase of fuzzy rules tuned fora specific tsk In our example application, the fuzzy system is designed to con depo- sition and eesion na stratigraphic simulation model. The domain variables fo which to define our conclusion sets ae: sediment type (wha) and amount (how much’), Since mote than one rule refering tothe same do- ‘main variable may be applicable fora cerain point in time and space, we need to be able 10 simultaneous evaluate several diferem fuzzy re. In the followin three-ule example, all rules have fuzzy conclusion sets defined on basis of the same domain variable, namely the mixture ratio between the end members sand and clay. The rules may be as follows: (1) (2) (3) IF deep OR far from source THEN clay> ‘These thee rules may be considered a complete (although very small) fuzzy system, Now, assume tata certain point on a modeled surface has 4 depth of $0 m, and a distance to the river mouth of 7500 m. Assume further thatthe coresponding truth values for each ofthe rules ae 0.2, (04, and 05, respectively, and that the conclusion ses have been modified according 10 these values using the maliplication method previously de: scribed (lft diagram in Figure 3B). The operations are shown graphically in Figure 4A. Since all tee rules are tue 1 some degree, we have 10 consider all of them simultaneously in order to establish what kind of sediment isto be deposited. The way this i done is by disjunction. Tt isthe rules ae combined according to: . The curves are in this way added (ovefsin upon each oer) co form a new cure, which isthe membership function of a resulting compourd fz ret (Fig. 4B). Provided that his new fuzzy set represents something meaningful (sit similar to any established fuzzy ses? Can a suitable term be found for it, it may be used as iis. Usually, however, a quantitative output ie, a crisp mumber, is desired. Tis is extracted through a defzifcaion procedure in which some relevant criterion is use to produce one specific umber fom a metmbersip function. The most common method involves finding the centroid, ie. the center of mas, fo the area below the mem- bership cure (Fig. 48), Another method (commen in business applici- tions) isto simply choose the point withthe highest value. The procedure of evaluating the thre rules above involves some actions that may appear od. For instance, the contadition in Rule 2, i the combination of a set with its complement using the Topic operator AND, obviously is not possible in conventional two- valued logic. In fuzzy logic, however, itis 2 perfectly valid operation. Since the concept “shallow” fuzzy there should indeed be a depth range over which itis shallow, but 1 the sae time not so shallow. We have no difcuites in dealing with Such stations in rea life, using contradictory statements such as"... both far and near..." ... big, bu then again not so big..." oF ia between large and small ‘Another peculiarity isthe combination of the individual conclusion sets into a compound set though disjunction (OR). It helps to think ofthis procedure as combining fragmental knowiedge. Data are processed onthe MODELING STRATIGRAPHY USING FUZZY LOGIC ‘ 93 109) wet 85 Mea basis of pices of existing knowledge (rues). Different pieces may yield slighty differen results. Since al are teated in parle, all are ina way considered “ue”, and the grand result sa compromise in te form of a ‘more or less fuzzy notion of what the answer should be, or what action should be taken. A resultant fuzzy set with one clear peak or maximum and a small spread at the base may be taken to representa sae” answer, je, one about which there is litle doubt, A resultant fuzzy ses with two cor move clearly defined separate maxima may represent an ambiguous re sult, i. there is more than one possible answer—a situation that is nor- mally stlved by adding more data. or increasing the knowledge (more rls). There i also the possibilty that the answer in facts unambiguous and that both peaks ae *‘corect” and justified (sin the case ofa bimodal srin-size distribution, for instar). plexity —In spite of the very simple basic stvetare and function cof fuzzy sysems, they have proven extremely effective for modeling com- plex nonlinear relationships. Neural networks handle similar degrees of complexity but are very hard to “figure ow” and are therefore often re- Fs. $—The proces of fizzy infereace. A) Evaluation of tee rues, asurnng a depth of 50 manda dsance of 7500 m wo be source ‘This ils fo each ule, a number between 210 alone (02,04, and 05, respective) hich sued to modify th ule'sconlson set by mules c.g, 3B. B) Agaregation of ules though dunton ress ina Compound furry st THs setuid Brough fxcaton of th cen (ch ee has the vale 85). garded as “black boxes". Fuzzy systems are completely open, ensy to undetstand, and easy to modify. A good example of how powerful fuzzy systems can bein solving complex nonlinear problems is given by Kosko (1992, p. 339, Relationships that can be described by straight lines or very simple curved lines, such as ‘‘a” and “*b” in Figure 5, ae obviously easily modeled using conventional mathematical functions. Relationships such as that represented by Curve "onthe other hard, ae beter handled using fuzzy logic. A conventional mathematical system describing such a highly noolinear relationship would have to be very elaborate (and virtually incomprehensible). As complexity increases, the numberof sets and rules in a fuzzy system also increase, but each rule stil “‘makes sense’ on its own, andthe system therefore remains comprehensible and manageable. It should be noted, however, thatthe number of rules tends te increase exponentially when increasing the numberof variables inthe system. The "curse of dimensionality” i thus a realty also for fuzzy systems. 0 b ULE NORDLUND Fr. $-Linearo simple nonlinear reatonstis (su a represented by Curves a ant ar easly modeled using matbemacl functions, while compen noalieas relationships (Care cae beter modeled using fz legie FUIZY STRATIGRAPHIC MODELING In the stratigraphic modeling aplication we use as an example a simple fuzzy system is used for controlling deposition and erosion over a surface similar that in Figure 2B. In simulating sediment cistribtion, al ules in the sytem are evaluated for each ime step and foreach pin: (cel) on the modeled suefae. The procedure is (1) Crisp values, one foreach input domain variable (depth, distance to soure, distance to shor) for which ther ae fuzzy sets defined, are mea- sured or computed from the model. (The domain variables ae also ste variables because they describe the curent sate ofthe model.) (2) The crisp numbers derived are then fuzied, ie, wansformed into ‘degrees of membership inthe fuzzy sets used by the rules (ef. Fig. 3). (3) Each rl inthe fuzzy system is evaluated and sts conclusion set is ‘modified according to the tat ofthe premise (f. Fig 3B), (4) The modified conclusion sets are aggregated through disjunction by ‘overaying thei membership functions forming compound fuzzy ses, one for each ouput variable (cf. Fig. 4B) (5) Crisp numbers are produced through defuzzitcation ofthe compound fuzzy sets (Fig. 4B). These numbers ae the final result of the fuzzy pro- cessing Figures 6 and 7 show the result fom a simalation using the ules in ‘Table 1 Apart from the fuzzy sytem, the input data forthe simulation were as fllows: (1) A sinusoidal seo-evel curve with an amplitude of 30, sm and a cycle length of 20,000 yr. (2) A tectonic subsidence rate of 0.001 nyt atte right (dsl) margin, linearly decreasing to zero at hinge zone cated 10 km left (proximal ofthe modeled area. (3) An intial surface similar to that in Figure 2. (4) A simulation time of 70,00 yr and a time step of 200 yr. (Note that no probabilities have tobe defined. since ran- (defined on basis of domain variable depth”), (Gefinsd on “distance 10 source”), (3) (de- fined on “temperstre”), and (defined on “energy expo- sure", i roughly the dip towards the open ocean), respectively. After having defined the membership functions for these sets—which should be «rather simple task—the rule is added tothe fuzzy sys ‘em, Subsequent simulations using ths extended system result in deposition of reef carbonates ifthe condions ae favorable (Le, i the new rule is ‘more eve than any competing rules). Provided thatthe domain variables ae defined, the complete operation of adding ret growth to cur model 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 ~ 0 40 80 % clay Fe, ULF NORDLUND 0 |_| 0 10 thickness Diagrams showing the one-dimensional dsbation of lay (lf diagram) and bed thickness (oughly reflecting he sedimention rae) athe pit of inesetion between eo sons in Figure 6A, Note ow oar sediments ar aso with hiker bed, The coasenng-upwad pater nthe lay agra (ear asited ih proradtoral pases and ae produced dung periods of sillsand o sow fll of sea evel (Noe the simlaty betwee hs curve andthe expe gma ray respons om srr type of sucesions) Te jaged appearance of te thickness curve righ) esa of lbeswiching, would take afew minutes. This isto be compared withthe time and effort necessary 10 include reefs in 2 model using conventional mathematical methods for deposition Tre fenblity slo means thatthe responsibilty for the perfomance is largely wansfemed from the designe ofthe modeling program to the user ‘The vser (the geologist) is not inthe hands of some predefined set of equa ‘ions for which it at best is posible to adjust few coefciens, but rather thas complete control over the system (within the limits ofthe defined domain vaiables). A practical consequence ofthis is that it becomes very easy 0 ‘experiment for instance, 1 test hypotheses This increased feedem, how eve, also means that a larger measure of understanding and knowledge i required in order to produce a working model. Tere ae no built-in "sfery devices" to reduce the effect of poorly defined sets or rules. ‘One restriction (which is general, and not limited to fuzzy systems) is MODELING STRATIGRAPHY USING FUZZY LOGIC Tow Higa” thatthe domain varihles (state variables) on which the fuzzy sets are based eed 10 be predefined. The domain variables are general variables suchas distances, angles, and temperatures, whose values are measured from the cument model or received from an esteeal soar (afl), Preferably, 2 large cumber of domain variables should be available ina simulator, but only those curently used by the fuzzy system should be computed Robusiness Although the number of fuzzy sets and fuzzy rules used in the example in Table | is small, the fuzzy sytem appeared to cover different situations, ice, combinations of values inthe input variables, very well. During the work with the stratigraphic modeling eppliation, several models similar to the above examples, but with diflerect parameter stings. different types of intial topography, diferent eusaic and subsidence curves, ad also dliferen fuzzy sytem, were wed. The general impression from these ex terisesis that similar results are reached even if the eles andor sets were slightly redefined, oc if differen strategies were used for modification of conclusion sets and defuzifiaton, The rles ae, however, more sensitive to changes than the set. I does pot mater much to the result if diferent geologists define the fuzzy ses for the system in Table, since most would regard the top few meters of wate as being "shallow", andthe next few tens of meters as being sucessvely less so. This kind of pression is salfcient o achieve similar results, The rules, on the ther hand, are more sensitive, especially in small systems. Rules are also less easy to agree ‘on—diflerent geologists may have very diferent ideas of what sedimens ae to be expeced in diferent locations. In general, however, it can be concladed that realistic sts and rules also give realistic resus, Precition Another aspect of precision than that of its relation to information (is- cussed above) is that it often is unnecessary. Inthe stratigraphic modeing ‘example this becomes very obvious, We are, for instance, aot in any way heped by kaowing distances or depths with high precision. For instance, it does no mate ia point is loated a distance of 10455 m or 10.456 m from the source —what mates is whether it is “near”, “ar”, “very far ct, ftom the source. Similarly ts meaningless to use depth values with resolution of a meter or less. This is trv also forthe ourpt vals ‘The uncertsinty associated with the outpu is represented by the member. Ship function ofthe compound fuzzy se. AS mentioned, a narrow, well defined peak may indicate higher precision, while a fltened curve may indicate less precision. The crisp number extracted fom the compound fuzzy set inthe defuzification process isa practical necessij—it des not imply high pression. It would obviously be incoret to imply that a strt ‘graphic simulation model could prouce results with high enough precision {0 justify using exact numerical output Averaging Effects More rules implies more compromising which in tur usally means less istnct results. It can be shown that the membership function ofthe re sulting compound fuzzy set is successively “Batened out” with the ad oor iio of more rules. However, such general loss of deal requires avery Jarge number of rules and is therefore not a major problem in practical ‘work, A elated, more serious problem concerns ie diferences inthe gen eralty or specificity ofthe rules ina sytem, and the undesirable averaging effects general rules may have, The following two rules illustrate tis (1) ‘, and (2) . The frst of these rues requires only that its shallow and may thus be valid over a larg are, e.g, fom the beach all the way out to the shelf edge, while the second rule is more restricted ane applies ony to those pars of te shallow area that ae ex- posed to high energy (eg. the beach). However, in these areas also the fist, more general rue applies. Te result is ths an average between the conclusions “clayey sand” and ‘clean sand’. In fact, the conclusion of rule two, “clean sand, is never reached, This, of course, 1 una ceptable because it obviously’ does not agree with our notion of haw these ‘ules should apply. We tend to give the more specific rule higher priocty because it presumably is based on more information {nore knowledge) One way of geting around this averaging problem is to reformulate the fis rule according to: , thereby making the two rules compatible as regards specificity. Such an approach works for small systems, ..,as long asthe number of rules is smal, but becomes dificult for mare complex systems because of the large numberof negate ses necessary in the premises, An alterative solution isto rank the rules inorder of specificity based on, fr instance, the number of conitens in the premise. The rues are then evaluated in succession wit the most specie first and the most general ast. while at the sare time suppressing rules further back in the list (cf. Yager 1993). Initial ests indicate that his approach may work very well ina stratigraphic ‘modeling application. Conclusions as Input Sometimes it appears aif the output (concusia) from one rule o set of rules woud be usefl as input (premise) to oter rules. An obvious example is the requirement for limited clastic influence in order to prdace refs, In the example above this was achieved through coniton represented by Lhe fury set , which mae sue tat ree would no cw ‘eat a Fiver mou. A beter alemative would be wo replace his witha set such as , the truth value of which could be atid by firing the rules refering to deposition of castes prior to the ree-elated rule(s. It seems probable tat some fuzzy systems, such as those used for modeling sediment dsriuton, ideally should have a hierarchical sracture, ‘because this would allow for more coenient modeling of interdependences among the outpu variables (cf. Elkan 1994, p. 5). Possible Geological Applications ‘There is a wealth of geological dts collected during more than a cen- tury that is avaiable enly in qualitative frm. Countless numbers of lth lgical descriptions from outcrops and wel, and thousands of taxonomic descriptions of fosils, are good examples. Geological processes, and re- lationships between geological variables, are furthermore usually very com- plex and dificult to formalize, Considering this, i appears as if methods related to fuzzy logic may be particularly useful to geologists, Areas that should benefit greatly from a fuzzy approach are, for instance, prediction, ‘modeling, and classification Prediction —Lithologcal prediction is an important par of hydrocarbon exploration. Based on mainly geophysical data such a seisics and well logs, predictions focus on spatial arrangements of lithological units poten tially suitable a6 reservits, transport paths, and soures for hydrcarbons. ‘Toe proces of prediction involves building and testing models fr sedi ‘mentologc and tectonic history, bari histor, etc. Although often avery large amount of date usually is available, and although technical resources 698 such as computers ey ae a problem. uch of the model building and imerprettion is dove manually. One of the reasons for this ha the sumeriel methods used cannot cope withthe sarety oF stern ype of data avaiable. Apa from hard geophysical dt ther re data the fem of geological knowledge, both general and specific (eg, peraining 10a portale ara), data from analogous outcrops, and qualitative wel ita ‘nm well site geologists and log analysts. The point is that much of hese daa, a well a the knowledge needed to iterpret them, ae qualia rather than quantitative and thus dificult to tre using conventional m- serial metods. A well log for instance, contains inematon nately in the form of absolute o relative numerical values at vidual depths bu abo inthe shape of the leg cures, Curses may be refered to as “bell shaped” or funel shaped”, and be associated with centain facies or de- postion envionment. Qultaive tem eering to shape ae often very Aifcu wo quan. If some automated system is use, the geologist i sualy freed to choose one, and nly ope, of a et of posse shapes in order to make the information available tothe system. Thece i no room for vagueness or ambiguity. A fuzzy clasication, on the other and, ‘woud allow for this ype of uncertainty and woul therefore be & beter alemaie. An analysis of shape is also of prime concer in seismic ner pretation. 4 seismic interpreter Gif employed by an oil compeny) would ‘probably become very interested in someting like a lens-sped obec atthe base of a slope” (assuming that otker conditions were favorable) ‘As with he lg shapes th expressions “lens shaped” and “base of ioe are dificult 10 formalize an thus not easy 10 incorporate ino iid serial systems. The problem in prediction often isnot ack of dita, bu rather inability co use them effectively. Modeling —The ably of fuzzy systems to map highly nonlinear rel onships makes them poteta candidates also for tasks tainly re served fo diferent ethods of mathematical regression (multiple, piece wise lear, noliear), An example may be the complex. relationship be ‘ween porosity snd perneility This s neni, but also dependent on several other, olen quately expressed variables suchas sorting, gain shercty, and grain roundees, and reed to diagenesis, mineralogy, sad

    You might also like