Evaluates gold prospectivity mapping, showing significant enrichment in mineralized points.
Declining gold discovery rates require prospectivity workflows that are statistically transparent at the regional scale, while remaining adaptable to project-scale geological interpretation. We present a robust sampled weights-of-evidence (sampled-WoE) workflow for gold prospectivity mapping in the Yilgarn Craton, Western Australia. Mine and deposit records were cleaned using 400 m spatial deduplication, yielding 7203 representative mineralized points from 12,036 strict training records. Unlabeled background points were repeatedly sampled within the Yilgarn Craton and stratified by lithology, greenstone-belt membership, and structural-density class. Ten evidence variables were evaluated diagnostically, and an independence audit based on Spearman correlation and Cramér’s V defined a six-layer regional stack comprising lithological setting, fault density, magnetic anomaly, gravity anomaly, K, and Th. Stress tests showed limited sensitivity to random seeds and background-sample sizes, whereas larger exclusion buffers systematically inflated several weights. The conservative no-buffer scenario was therefore selected as the primary model. The highest-ranked 5% of the study area captured 49.23% of the valid representative mineralized points, corresponding to a descriptive 9.85-fold enrichment over random spatial selection; spatial-block out-of-sample validation retained a 45.4% Top-5% capture and 9.1-fold enrichment. The reproducible regional baseline provides a consistent basis for separate project-scale geological refinement and validation. Under spatial-block cross-validation, the out-of-sample Top-5% capture was 45.4% (9.1-fold enrichment), and a non-spatial random cross-validation (49.3%) confirmed that spatial blocking removes the optimism introduced by spatial autocorrelation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: