minerals

Article
Evaluation of Deep Isolation Forest (DIF) Algorithm for Mineral
Prospectivity Mapping of Polymetallic Deposits
Mobin Saremi 1 , Seyed Milad Bagheri Ghadikolaei 2,3, *, Seyyed Ataollah Agha Seyyed Mirzabozorg 4 ,
Najmaldin Ezaldin Hassan 5 , Zohre Hoseinzade 6 , Abbas Maghsoudi 1 , Shahabaldin Rezania 7 ,
Hojjatollah Ranjbar 8 , Basem Zoheir 9 and Amin Beiranvand Pour 3

1 Department of Mining Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran 1591634311, Iran;

[Link]@[Link] (M.S.); [Link]@[Link] (A.M.)
2 School of Distance Education (SDE), Geography Section, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM),
Gelugor 11800, Malaysia
3 Institute of Oceanography and Environment (INOS), Higher Institution Center of Excellence (HICoE) in
Marine Science, University Malaysia Terengganu (UMT), Kuala Nerus, Kuala Terengganu 21030, Malaysia;
[Link]@[Link]
4 School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran 1417935840, Iran
5 College of Engineering, Civil and Environment Department, University of Zakho, Duhok 42001, Iraq;
[Link]@[Link]
6 Department of Mining Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 8415683111, Iran;
[Link]@[Link]
7 Department of Environment and Energy, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Republic of Korea;
[Link]@[Link]
8 Department of Mining Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman 7616914111, Iran;
[Link]@[Link]
9 Department of Geosciences, King Fahd, University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261,
Saudi Arabia; [Link]@[Link]
Citation: Saremi, M.; Bagheri * Correspondence: milad.b.g@[Link]; Tel.: +60-122572063
Ghadikolaei, S.M.; Agha Seyyed
Mirzabozorg, S.A.; Hassan, N.E.; Abstract: Mineral prospectivity mapping (MPM) is crucial for efficient mineral exploration, where
Hoseinzade, Z.; Maghsoudi, A.; prospective zones are identified in a cost-effective manner. This study focuses on generating prospec-
Rezania, S.; Ranjbar, H.; Zoheir, B.;
tivity maps for hydrothermal polymetallic mineralization in the Feizabad area, in northeastern Iran,
Beiranvand Pour, A. Evaluation of
using unsupervised anomaly detection methods, i.e., isolation forest (IForest) and deep isolation
Deep Isolation Forest (DIF) Algorithm
forest (DIF) algorithms. As mineralization events are rare and complex, traditional approaches
for Mineral Prospectivity Mapping of
Polymetallic Deposits. Minerals 2024,
continue to encounter difficulties, despite advances in MPM. In this respect, unsupervised anomaly
14, 1015. [Link] detection algorithms, which do not rely on ground truth samples, offer a suitable solution. Here, we
min14101015 compile geospatial datasets on the Feizabad area, which is known for its polymetallic mineralization
showings. Fourteen evidence layers were created, based on the geology and mineralization charac-
Academic Editors: Amirabbas
teristics of the area. Both the IForest and DIF algorithms were employed to identify areas with high
Karbalaeiramezanali and
mineralization potential. The DIF, which uses neural networks to handle non-linear relationships
Martiya Sadeghi
in high-dimensional data, outperformed the traditional decision tree-based IForest algorithm. The
Received: 11 August 2024 results, evaluated through a success rate curve, demonstrated that the DIF provided more accurate
Revised: 29 September 2024 prospectivity maps, effectively capturing complex, non-linear relationships. This highlights the
Accepted: 6 October 2024
DIF algorithm’s suitability for MPM, offering significant advantages over the IForest algorithm.
Published: 8 October 2024
The present study concludes that the DIF algorithm, and similar unsupervised anomaly detection
algorithms, are highly effective for MPM, making them valuable tools for both brownfield and
greenfield exploration.
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Keywords: deep isolation forest (DIF); isolation forest (IForest); prospectivity models; hydrothermal
This article is an open access article polymetallic mineralization; unsupervised anomaly detection
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
[Link]/licenses/by/
4.0/).

Minerals 2024, 14, 1015. [Link] [Link]

Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 2 of 24

1. Introduction
Mineral prospectivity mapping (MPM) is an important framework in mineral explo-
ration that is used to reduce exploration costs, minimize risk, reduce uncertainty during
the exploration phases, and ultimately identify potential mineral zones [1]. MPM com-
bines geospatial datasets with two primary approaches: knowledge-driven methods and
data-driven techniques [2–4]. Knowledge-driven approaches focus on the metallogenic
background and mineralization rules, relying on specialized knowledge within the min-
eral exploration field and the informed opinions of experts [5]. However, this method is
often subject to a high degree of uncertainty, due to its reliance on expert opinion [1,6].
In contrast, data-driven techniques, including machine learning [7–9] and deep learning
approaches [10,11], focus on identifying relationships between known mineral deposits
and feature layers, as well as uncovering hidden relationships associated with mineral-
ization [12]. In recent decades, various supervised machine learning methods, such as
logistic regression [13], support vector machines [14,15], and random forests [13,16], as
well as unsupervised algorithms, such as K-means [17,18] and IForest [13] algorithms, are
increasingly being used for MPM.
Mineralization is a rare local occurrence, influenced by various geological processes [12].
In MPM, the conceptual model and attributes of the target deposit are used to extract
mineralization-related features, which are then utilized to create the evidence layer [6,19].
Therefore, high values in each evidence layer have a strong relationship and significant
correlation with some of the known mineral occurrences in a study area. Compared to
other data points, the data from known mineral occurrences have higher values in most
of the evidence layers [12]. Therefore, these evidence layers also have anomalous values
associated with mineralization, which highlight significant anomalies. These anomalies rep-
resent important features related to the mineralization being sought and exhibit non-linear
and complex behavior. Hence, machine learning methods based on anomaly detection can
be used to identify mineralization and model its complex, hidden, and non-linear behavior.
These methods can recognize patterns that are difficult to detect using conventional meth-
ods. In other words, anomaly detection algorithms are used to identify these meaningful
anomalies and patterns in multi-source geospatial datasets [20].
Machine learning anomaly detection algorithms are capable of detecting anomalies and
examining high-dimensional, complex, and non-linear data and hidden structures. During
data mining, anomaly detection aims to identify data points that deviate significantly
from the normal distribution. The main function of intelligent algorithms that are based
on anomaly detection is to recognize outlier data points that differ from the rest of the
dataset, according to a certain metric. These samples exhibit unusual behavior and are
referred to as outliers. In the field of mineral exploration, anomaly detection has been
applied in various fields, such as multi-element geochemical anomaly detection [21] and
MPM studies [22]. Chen and Wu (2017) applied the one-class support vector machine
(OCSVM) for gold prospectivity mapping in the Laotudingzi–Xiaosiping district, assuming
that mineralization is a rare occurrence due to regional geological processes [20]. Their
study showed that OCSVM models can provide valuable results in detecting anomalies in
high-dimensional data, without assumptions about the underlying data distribution. Their
results indicated that the OCSVM model outperformed the restricted Boltzmann machine
model in terms of the ROC, AUC, and processing efficiency. The gold targets predicted
by the OCSVM model and the restricted Boltzmann machine model were closely spatially
related to known gold deposits and matched the regional geological characteristics of the
study area. However, when applying the OCSVM model for MPM, it is crucial to properly
define the parameter v, as it can affect the performance of the model in detecting anomalies.
Moreover, the detection of geochemical anomalies associated with ore mineralization is
an essential task in geochemical exploration [23]. Mineralization is a rare occurrence in
the Earth’s crust and can, therefore, be considered a low probability event. To address
this issue, Wang et al. (2020) used geochemical data from stream sediments and six
unsupervised machine learning methods to identify geochemical anomalies associated
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 3 of 24

with polymetallic Ag–Pb–Zn mineralization [24]. The results from the study suggest that
the IForest algorithm is a reliable and efficient unsupervised machine learning algorithm
for detecting geochemical anomalies associated with mineralization and that its integration,
with appropriate dimensionality reduction techniques, can lead to more accurate detection
of related anomalies. Consequently, algorithms based on unsupervised anomaly detection
are widely used in geochemistry and MPM studies.
A major advantage of unsupervised anomaly detection algorithms is their indepen-
dence from labeled ground data, which makes them reliable for MPM in greenfield and
brownfield areas [12]. Among the unsupervised anomaly detection algorithms avail-
able, the IForest algorithm is characterized by its efficiency in detecting anomalies, while
maintaining low computational complexity [25,26]. IForest, a shallow ensemble learning
algorithm based on decision trees, excels at identifying exploration anomalies in complex
geospatial datasets [26]. It converges quickly and ensures a high level of data processing
efficiency. The main function of an IForest algorithm is to identify anomalies by ensuring
that they are “far” from other data points in a given feature space [27]. To detect these
anomalies in a decision space, the IForest algorithm generates random split trees to isolate
each data point. Then, for each tree, the number of branches required to separate each point
is calculated [27]. The average of this number of branches determines the expected path
length used to isolate a point of interest [27]. This expected path length is usually small
for anomalies.
In contrast to other methods, the IForest algorithm does not model unit cell popula-
tions, but isolates anomaly cells directly through random partitioning. In MPM studies, the
anomaly scores generated by the IForest algorithm can be used directly for the identification
of anomaly cells in a raster map [28]. However, the IForest algorithm has difficulties in
detecting hard anomalies in a high-dimensional and non-linearly partitionable data space,
as it only performs axis-parallel isolation operations (linear partitioning) when constructing
isolation trees [29,30]. Deep isolation forest (DIF) [30] is the most recent and probably most
promising extension of the IForest algorithm, which was proposed to address this limitation
of the original algorithm and facilitate the identification of non-linear relationships between
complex features [31]. The DIF algorithm addresses this limitation by using randomly
initialized neural networks to project data into random representation ensembles in which
the hard anomalies can be easily isolated with axis-parallel slices, which would correspond
to non-linear partitioning in the original space [30,32].
The aim of this study is to model the mineral potential of hydrothermal copper
deposits and evaluate the performance of the IForest and DIF algorithms. To evaluate the
effectiveness of these algorithms, we conducted a case study in the Feizabad region, an area
known for its ore potential. First, 14 evidence layers were developed, based on a conceptual
model of the deposit being sought. Subsequently, these algorithms were used to generate
mineral potential maps. Finally, the results were evaluated using the success rate curve.

2. Geology of the Study Area

The study area, with an area of about 1154 km2 , is located in the northern part of the
1:100,000 scale geologic map of Feizabad in Khorasan Razavi province (Figure 1), which is
located between central Iran and the Lut block [33]. The Feizabad district is located 185 km
south of Mashhad. Fault movements have significantly influenced the rock facies changes
in this region. The Doruneh fault, which runs through the center of the district and divides
the study area into northern and southern parts, is one of the main faults in this area [34].
Volcanic and pyroclastic rocks of Tertiary age occur mainly in the northern section of this
fault. In addition to intrusive rocks, sedimentary units are also present in the northern part
of the region. The tuffs in this region often have a rhyolitic to rhyodacitic composition, while
the lava has andesite content. Intrusive rocks from the Eocene and Oligocene periods in the
form of granodiorite and diorite are mainly found in the northern part of the region [33,35].
Predominant deposit categories in the study area, near intrusive and volcanic rocks, include
iron oxide–copper–gold (IOCG) deposits, epithermal bases, precious metal species, Cu
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 4 of 24

veins, and porphyritic Cu–Au systems (e.g., Tanorcheh deposit) [34]. In addition to the
above-mentioned mineralization, hydrothermal alteration zones have been identified, due
to granodiorite and granite formations. Magma and hydrothermal fluids have caused the
alteration of the rocks. The most important alteration zones in this region are iron oxide,
silicified, propylitic, phyllic, and argillic zones. These alterations often occur along faults
and near intrusive rocks. Faults and fractures, which direct the flow of fluid material,
play a crucial role in the formation of these zones. The primary ore minerals in the main
mineralized zones consist mainly of pyrite, chalcopyrite, magnetite, specularite, and gold,
while the secondary minerals goethite, hematite, malachite, and azurite, are common in
oxidized zones.

Figure 1. Simplified geological map of Feizabad region [33].

3. Conceptual Model
One of the most important steps in MPM is the definition of an appropriate conceptual
and descriptive model for the mineralization being sought [19]. A conceptual model
includes the key characteristics and criteria of the mineralization being sought and is
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 5 of 24

defined based on the characteristics of similar known mineral occurrences (KMOs). This
model helps exploration geologists to select relevant criteria and identify new exploration
targets in the region. In other words, important evidence layers for MPM are selected
according to this descriptive model, which emphasizes the importance of defining an
accurate conceptual model. Based on the studies on hydrothermal copper deposits and
previous MPM research in this region, the following key features can be used to build a
prospectivity model for hydrothermal copper:
• Hydrothermal copper mineralization, such as Cu–Au porphyry, in the Feizabad area
shows a significant spatial correlation with intrusive rocks, such as diorite and gra-
nodiorite from the Eocene–Oligocene transition [34,36]. Therefore, the proximity to
these units, which serve as a primary heat source, is an important indicator for the
identification of new exploration targets in the region;
• The formation of hydrothermal deposits, such as Cu–Au mineralization, is associated
with the movement of metal-rich fluids through fractures and faults [37]. These
geological factors, especially their intersections, act as conduits for fluid movement.
In the studied area, faults have played a crucial role in mineralization. Therefore, the
proximity to fault intersections can be considered as a key factor and important layer
in the MPM analysis;
• Geochemical exploration is a key method for the exploration of hydrothermal copper
deposits. Previous studies conducted in the study area have demonstrated a strong
association between elements such as Cu, Au, Hg, Pb, Zn, Sn, As, and Sb [6]. In
addition, the results show that the geochemical maps of these elements closely match
the known hydrothermal copper mineralization in the region [6]. Therefore, these
eight elements were selected for this study;
• In general, hydrothermal and iron oxide alteration have been shown to be the main
features of hydrothermal deposits, such as porphyry copper mineralization [38]. Alter-
ation halos, such as potassic, phyllic, argillic, and propylitic zones, as well as iron oxide
alteration, are typically found in the vicinity of hydrothermal copper deposits and
have a considerable spatial extent. Therefore, ASTER remote sensing image processing
was used in this study to identify areas that exhibit these alterations.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Data Used
MPM typically utilizes and integrates multiple types of data, including geochemi-
cal [39,40], geophysical [41–43], remote sensing [44,45], and geological data [37,46]. This
integration enables a comprehensive assessment of the geological features and anomalies
that may indicate the presence of mineral deposits.

4.1.1. Regional-Scale Geochemical Sampling

In the study region, the point data can be divided into two categories: mineralization
points (known as mineral occurrences or deposits) and stream sediment geochemical data.
The former was used to evaluate the prospectivity models, while the latter was applied
to create geochemical evidence layers. A systematic sampling network, with a cell size
of 1400 × 1400 square meters, was established within the 1:100,000 scale geological map
of Feizabad to collect the samples. Stream sediments were collected from the primary
drainage in each grid window. Subsequently, all the collected samples within each window
were homogenized and a composite sample was assigned to the center of the window. A
total of 1033 stream sediment samples were systematically collected by the Jiang Cheng
company, in cooperation with the Geological Survey of Iran (GSI), from the study area,
at intervals of 1400 m. These samples were analyzed in the Jiang Cheng laboratory for
28 elements, using the inductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectrometry (ICP-
OES) method and, for gold (Au), through the fire assay, using appropriate preparation and
coding procedures. After analyses, the data were subjected to a strict quality control (QC)
process. This included checking the accuracy and precision of the results by using reference
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 6 of 24

standards, repeating analyses on important samples, and performing various statistical

evaluations. Once the reliability of the data was assured, it was approved by the GSI and
made available to users.
The northern section of the 1:100,000 geological sheet in Feizabad consists of sedi-
mentary units, different types of tuffs, volcanic and pyroclastic rocks of Tertiary age, and
intrusive rocks of Eocene–Oligocene age. This part of the study area is, therefore, more im-
portant from a geological point of view than the southern section. The number of samples
that fall into this area amounts to 587 samples. Accordingly, a total of 587 stream sediment
samples were used to create the geochemical evidence layers. The distribution of the stream
sediment samples collected from the study area is shown in Figure 2. Previous studies in
the Feizabad region have revealed a remarkable correlation between hydrothermal copper
mineralization and various elements, such as Cu, Zn, Pb, Au, Sn, Hg, As, and Sb [6,47].
As a result, basic statistical parameters for these elements were calculated and analyzed.
First, histograms of the key elements were plotted (Figure 3), showing that these elements
do not follow a normal distribution. This indicates a high potential for hydrothermal
copper mineralization in this region [47]. In addition, the relationship between Cu and the
key elements is shown in Figure 4a, and a heatmap of the correlation matrix is shown in
Figure 4b, which shows that these elements correlate relatively well with each other. This
confirms the results from previous studies conducted in the region.

Figure 2. The distribution of the collected stream sediment samples in the study area.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 7 of 24

Figure 3. Histograms for the key elements linked to hydrothermal copper mineralization.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 8 of 24

Figure 4. (a) The relationship between Cu and the key elements. (b) A correlation matrix heatmap for
the key elements related to the hydrothermal copper mineralization.

4.1.2. Remote Sensing Data and Preprocessing

The TERRA satellite was launched in December 1999, with the ASTER sensor and four
other sensors. It began taking images in March 2000. The ASTER sensor takes images with
a width of 60 km and displays them as standard images of 60 × 60 km. This sensor provides
high-quality images, with a high signal-to-noise ratio, and can capture stereo images to
create a digital elevation model. ASTER satellite images are widely used in geological
research and for the identification of hydrothermal alterations related to ore mineralization
due to their excellent spatial and spectral resolution, especially in regard to shortwave
infrared (SWIR) bands [38,48–50]. For the study, an ASTER image (00307262004065434)
from the USGS website was used to identify the hydrothermal alterations associated with
hydrothermal copper mineralization in the Feizabad area. The ASTER image was corrected
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 9 of 24

for atmospheric influences using the IARR method (Internal Average Relative Reflectance)
and the radiance data were converted into reflectance values [39].

4.1.3. Geological Data

Geological data provide essential information for the exploration of mineral deposits
and for the creation of prospectivity models. Two-dimensional geological maps show
basic information about different lithologic units and the distribution of faults and their
intersections. This information is valuable for the creation of evidence layers [19]. A
digitized map of lithological units and faults in the Feizabad area was used for this study.
Analyzing the geological units and fault structures using these maps helps exploration
geologists to gain a deeper understanding of the patterns associated with mineralization.

4.2. Methodological Flowchart

Figure 5 illustrates the methodological flowchart used in this study to analyze the
geospatial data and generate a mineral potential model for the hydrothermal copper
deposits in the Feizabad district. As a first step, geochemical, geological, and remote sensing
layers were created using appropriate analytical techniques. To reduce the uncertainty and
improve the accuracy of the results, we used logistic functions to convert the values into
fuzzy space [6,51]. In the next step, we used intelligent algorithms, namely the IForest and
DIF algorithms, to combine the geospatial data and detect anomalies. Finally, a data-driven
success rate curve was used to evaluate the prospectivity models.

Figure 5. The workflow applied in this study to generate prospectivity models.

4.3. Logistic Function

In MPM, various evidence layers are used, considering the conceptual model of the
sought mineralization. Since these layers vary in terms of their dimensions, a weighting step
is necessary to normalize or rescale the unbounded exploration data for integration [1,37].
In this regard, the following logistic function was used [51]:

1
FE = (1)
1 + e − s ( E −i )
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 10 of 24

where FE is the value of the fuzzy membership; the assigned fuzzy score, s, is the slope of
the logistic function; i is the inflection point of the logistic function; and E is the weighted
fuzzy evidence falling into the domain [0, 1]. Also, the values of i and s are obtained from
Equations (2) and (3), respectively:

Emax + Emin
i= (2)
2
9.2
s= (3)
Emax − Emin

4.4. Isolation Forest

The IForest algorithm is a widely used shallow unsupervised anomaly detection method
that builds on decision trees (isolation tree) and benefits from ensemble learning [25,52]. It
builds an ensemble of isolation trees to iteratively partition the data using a random split
and to isolate anomalies. An isolation tree consists of a subset of data starting at the root
node and proceeding to an isolated leaf node, by recursively splitting the data into smaller
subsets, until each sample is isolated [30,53] (Figure 6). This concept assumes that anomalies
require fewer splits to be separated from other samples (normal samples) [54]. The major
advantage of the IForest algorithm is that it can detect anomalies without modelling or
profiling the data, by taking advantage of the fact that anomalies differ in regard to some
features [30].
The IForest algorithm assigns an anomaly score by calculating the average path needed
to isolate a sample in all isolation trees. For each sample, the path length (h( x )) is the
number of edges traversed from the root node to the isolated leaf node. Since it is expected
that abnormal samples should be easily isolated, they have a relatively shorter average
path [55]. The average path length (c(n)) and the anomaly score (s) can be calculated for a
given sample x, as follows [56]:
 
2( n − 1)
c(n) = 2H(n−1) − (4)
n

− E(ch((nx)))
s( x, n) = 2 (5)
where n is the number of data samples used for training; H(i) can be calculated from
ln(i ) + 0.5772156649; c(n) is used to normalize h( x ); and E(h( x )) is the average of h( x )
from a set of isolation trees. The number of trees (estimators) and maximum features are
the main hyperparameters of the IForest algorithm [57]. The former has a direct impact on
the performance of the model, in a such a way that more trees improve the performance of
the model. The latter one controls the number of features to be randomly selected and is
subsequently used for splitting, during the construction of each tree.

Figure 6. A schematic image of how an isolation tree is built and separate samples using axis-parallel
cuts (modified version of [58]).
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 11 of 24

4.5. Deep Isolation Forest

Deep isolation forest (DIF) [30] is a novel hybrid algorithm that merges casually
initialized (i.e., non-optimized) deep neural networks (DNNs) and IForest to take advantage
of both techniques. The general procedure of the DIF (Figure 7) is that the randomly
initialized DNN projects the original data into a set of random representation spaces. Then,
the classical IForest algorithm applies simple axis-parallel cuts in these newly created data
spaces to identify anomalous samples [59]. The main goal of the randomly initialized
DNN is to better detect hard anomalies that are not easily isolated in the original data. The
randomly initialized DNN was able to expose hard anomalies in the newly created spaces,
where the anomalous samples could be isolated using simple axis-parallel partitions. These
axis-parallel cuts in the projected data space correspond to sophisticated and non-linear
partitions in the original data space [30,32,59].

Figure 7. The workflow of DIF algorithm [30].

Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 12 of 24

5. Production of Continuous Evidence Layers

5.1. Geochemical Evidence Layers
The identified targets serve as promising locations that should be further investigated
in later phases of the exploration efforts. During MPM, various geospatial features, such as
geochemical data, are of great importance [6]. Geochemical studies, which are essential for
understanding the distribution and behavior of elements associated with mineralization,
play a crucial role in MPM, especially at the regional scale [40]. Exploration geochemistry
focuses on the analysis of trace elements that tend to be associated with primary min-
eralization, with an emphasis on the identification of “primary halos” and “secondary
halos” that form as a result of natural dispersion of trace elements [60]. These halos are
usually found in the vicinity of mineralization and must be accurately identified for effec-
tive exploration. The study of secondary halos and their correlation with mineralization
locations is a critical aspect of identifying new exploration targets. When analyzing stream
sediment geochemical data on a regional scale, the separation of geochemical anomalies
associated with mineralization and the creation of geochemical anomaly maps are essential
components of MPM [61]. The geochemical anomaly layer is a critical component for the
successful identification of areas with mineralization potential, especially for hydrothermal
copper deposits.
Various techniques and concepts have been developed to determine geochemical anoma-
lies and create layers of evidence for MPM on a regional scale [40,61,62]. These methods
primarily focus on investigating the behavior and geochemical information of elements that
show a positive association with mineralization [40,47]. In other words, the evidence layers
are created according to the conceptual model of the mineralization being sought. During
MPM with anomaly detection algorithms, it is important to use evidence layers that are
suitable and have a high correlation with the targeted mineralization [12]. In other words,
when using unsupervised anomaly detection methods, the layers will be better created based
on the conceptual model of the target mineralization. Therefore, the information on eight
geochemical elements was used in this study, according to the conceptual model (see Section 3)
of the sought mineralization, and the values of these layers were transformed into 0 and
1 spaces using the logistic function. Figure 8 shows the resulting layers.

Figure 8. Cont.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 13 of 24

Figure 8. The geochemical evidence layers linked to the hydrothermal copper mineralization in the
Feizabad district.

5.2. Proximity to the Hydrothermal Alteration Zones

Effective modeling of the mineralization potential of hydrothermal copper deposits
requires the provision of various footprints, including the geological features associated
with hydrothermal alteration related to mineralization. In this context, remote sensing
data, such as satellite imagery, plays a crucial role in accurately mapping the surface
distribution of these hydrothermal alterations, including argillic, phyllic, propylitic, and
iron oxide types, which are fundamental to accurate geological assessments [48,63,64]. In
this study, hydrothermal alteration zones associated with copper mineralization in the
Feizabad district were identified using ASTER imagery. The Band Ratio [64] and Spectral
Angle Mapper (SAM) [65] methods were then used to process the ASTER image, in order
to precisely identify and delineate the hydrothermal alteration zones. Band ratios of 4/2,
5/6, 7/6, and 8/9 were used for specific mapping of iron oxide minerals, argillic, phyllic,
and propylitic alteration zones. The SAM method was applied to selected endmember
minerals, such as kaolinite, muscovite, and chlorite. The spectral absorption features of
the endmember minerals in the SWIR bands of the ASTER image were used as the spectral
range for the detection of argillic, phyllic, and propylitic alteration zones. Kaolinite in
bands 5 and 6 (2.145 to 2.225 µm) was used to map the argillic zone, muscovite in bands
6 and 7 (2.185 to 2.285 µm) was used to identify the phyllic zone, and chlorite in bands
8 and 9 (2.295 to 2.430 µm) was used to delineate the propylitic zone. Threshold values
were then determined using statistical methods (mean + 2 standard deviations) and all
the regions that showed alteration zones were superimposed on a single band. Figure 9
illustrates the spatial distribution map of these hydrothermal alteration zones and their
spatial relationships to known mineral occurrences, intrusive rocks, and faults.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 14 of 24

Figure 9. The distribution map of hydrothermal alterations and their spatial relationships with
known mineral occurrences, intrusive rocks, and faults.

Given the strong correlation between the identified alteration zones and the geological
evidence, hydrothermal alteration is considered a key indicator for the exploration of
hydrothermal copper deposits. After delineating these alteration zones, four distance-based
evidence layers were created, as shown in Figure 10. These evidence layers significantly
improve the modeling of the potential of hydrothermal copper deposits, as they provide
important spatial data on hydrothermal alteration and, thus, improve the accuracy of the
exploration efforts.

Figure 10. The evidence layers related to the proximity maps of (a) the argillic alteration zone; (b) the
phyllic alteration zone; (c) the propylitic alteration zone; and (d) the iron oxide alteration zone.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 15 of 24

5.3. Proximity to Intrusive Rocks

Hydrothermal copper deposits, such as Cu–Au porphyry deposits and Cu veins, as
well as other hydrothermal systems, often occur in close association with intrusive rocks,
such as granite, granodiorite, and diorite from the Eocene–Oligocene period in the study
area [34–36]. These intrusive rocks have played a critical role in the formation of mineral
deposits in the Feizabad region, so proximity to these rocks significantly increases the
likelihood of discovering hydrothermal copper deposits [34]. Consequently, exploration
efforts in areas close to these intrusive rocks are more promising than in areas further
away. To develop a relevant evidence layer associated with intrusive rocks, the intrusive
units were first digitized using ArcMap 10.8. A layer was then created for the proximity to
the intrusive rocks. Subsequently, the values of this layer were transformed into a fuzzy
space using a logistic function to improve the precision and interpretability and reduce
the uncertainty in the MPM analysis. Figure 11 illustrates the constructed evidence layer
and shows a strong spatial correlation between the known mineral occurrences and these
layers. Therefore, this map can be used as a reliable and fundamental layer in mapping the
mineral prospectivity of hydrothermal copper deposits.

Figure 11. Proximity to the intrusive rocks in the Feizabad region.

5.4. Proximity to the Intersection of Faults

Extensive research has emphasized the critical role of structural anomalies in en-
hancing permeability and facilitating the formation of mineral deposits, especially metal
deposits [37,66]. Consequently, it can be assumed that most metallic mineralization occurs
in close proximity to these structural features. Thus, hydrothermal copper deposits have
unique and direct spatial and genetic relationships with faults [37]. Faulting plays an impor-
tant role in the formation of these deposits and can significantly influence the distribution
of alterations. Structural discontinuities, such as faults, are widely recognized as the main
indicator of the presence of hydrothermal copper deposits. Mineral-bearing magmatic and
hydrothermal fluids are transported through the rock via faults and fractures, especially at
their intersections [37]. These intersections are considered optimal locations for hydrother-
mal mineralization due to their increased permeability. In the Feizabad area, the distance
of fault intersections has been identified as a key structural factor controlling hydrothermal
mineralization. In this study, a map of the proximity to fault intersections was first created
(Figure 12). This map was then weighted using a logistic function. The resulting map was
then used to model the mineralization potential of hydrothermal copper deposits.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 16 of 24

Figure 12. Proximity to the intersection of faults in the study area.

6. Results and Analysis

6.1. Optimization of Unsupervised Anomaly Detection Algorithms
Hyperparameter tuning is of paramount importance for the performance of machine
learning and deep learning algorithms, including the IForest and DIF algorithms. The
optimal selection of these parameters depends on the specific characteristics of the dataset
used. For example, the IForest algorithm includes crucial parameters, such as the maximum
number of features and the number of trees. Consequently, these hyperparameters have
been optimized in this research. Similarly, the DIF algorithm includes parameters such as
the number of trees and the number of ensemble representations, which were carefully
optimized to enhance the algorithm’s performance.
The identification of suitable parameters usually requires the use of ground truth
samples. In general, the optimal parameters are determined by constructing an ROC curve
and evaluating the AUC, based on these samples [21]. The accuracy of the ROC curve
depends on both the positive and negative ground truth samples. However, in MPM
studies, especially at the regional scale, negative samples may not be available. In such
scenarios, negative samples are selected based on various constraints [67]. However, this
selection is inherently random, making the process a major challenge and a significant
source of uncertainty in MPM [68].
The Feizabad area has extensive known mineral deposits. Therefore, an evaluation
technique commonly used in MPM, called the success rate curve, was utilized to select the
optimal hyperparameters for the IForest and DIF algorithm. This curve is not based on
labeled negative samples and, thus, minimizes uncertainty. Therefore, different models
with various parameter settings were developed in this study and the success rate curve
was plotted for each model. Among all the models, two models were identified as the
most effective. In this context, we systematically investigated the optimal hyperparameters
for the two adopted algorithms. These include the number of trees (set to 1000) and the
maximum features (set to 14) for the IForest algorithm and the number of representations
(set to 5) and the number of trees (set to 100) for the DIF algorithm. The IForest and DIF
models are implemented using Sklearn 1.0.2 [69] and PyOD 2.0.2 [70], respectively, in a
Python 3.8 environment.

6.2. Integration of Continuous Evidence Layers

6.2.1. IForest Prospectivity Model
The Feizabad region is characterized by the presence of granodiorite and diorite
intrusive rocks, which have favored the development of hydrothermal alteration zones
and associated hydrothermal copper mineralization. The favorable tectonic environment
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 17 of 24

in the region favors the formation of such mineralization, which is often manifested by
the enrichment of elements, such as Cu, Sb, As, Au, Zn, Pb, and other trace elements. To
identify potential zones for hydrothermal copper deposits, we first created 14 evidence
layers (Figures 8–12) based on the mineralization characteristics and the conceptual model.
Recognizing that footprints associated with mineralization are a rare event with a low
probability of occurrence, we applied machine learning algorithms specifically designed
for anomaly detection. Among these algorithms, the IForest algorithm was selected due to
its effectiveness in detecting such anomalies. We applied an IForest algorithm to map the
mineral prospectivity for hydrothermal copper in northeastern Iran.
A comparative analysis between the resulting prospectivity model (Figure 13) and
the geological map (Figure 1) shows that the areas with the highest probability of min-
eralization, characterized by high prospectivity values, correspond closely with faulted
andesite and associated intrusive rocks. In addition, these anomalous zones show a strong
correlation with highly faulted tuffs. The correlation between known mineral occurrences
and areas of high prospectivity confirms the reliability of the prospectivity model created
with the IForest algorithm. The results underline the effectiveness of the IForest method
in delineating prospective zones for hydrothermal copper mineralization. However, it is
important to point out that the IForest algorithm has limitations in certain regions, partic-
ularly in the northern and central areas, and underperforms in recognizing some known
mineral occurrences. This shortcoming may be due to the difficulty encountered by the
algorithm in capturing the complex and non-linear geological patterns prevalent in these
areas. Consequently, more advanced techniques, such as the DIF algorithm, need to be
used to improve the accuracy of prospectivity mapping.

Figure 13. The IForest prospectivity model of the Feizabad region.

6.2.2. Deep Isolation Forest Prospectivity Model

Anomalies within evidence layers frequently demonstrate a strong spatial correlation
with the mineralization sought, despite exhibiting intricate and non-linear behavior. To
effectively identify such anomalies, advanced anomaly detection algorithms, such as the
DIF algorithm, can be utilized. In this research, the DIF algorithm, an extension of the classic
IForest algorithm, was employed to generate a prospectivity map of the Feizabad region
(Figure 14). In certain cases, this algorithm has surpassed the classical IForest algorithm
in accurately identifying hidden and intricate anomalies. For instance, it has exhibited
enhanced performance in detecting known mineral occurrences in the central and northern
parts of the region, where the classical IForest algorithm encountered limitations. This
highlights the capacity of strong and optimized intelligent algorithms to model non-linear
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 18 of 24

and complex geological behaviors, thereby identifying areas that are challenging to detect
using the basic IForest algorithm.

Figure 14. The DIF prospectivity model of the Feizabad region.

A success rate curve was applied to evaluate and validate the prospectivity models
created using the IForest and DIF methods. This curve is one of the most powerful and
widely recognized tools for evaluating the predictive capabilities of a model and provides
a measure of its accuracy. The assessment analyzes the spatial correlation between known
mineral occurrences and the classifications produced by each model [12,71]. Success rate
curves are particularly effective in comparing the performance of different prospectivity
models for mineral occurrences. From an MPM perspective, appropriate prospectivity
models should predict a larger number of known mineral occurrences over a smaller area.
Accordingly, the assessment method must facilitate the correlation between different map
classes and known mineral occurrences. To achieve this, the map was first classified and
then a success rate curve was created to evaluate the accuracy of the classification. This
curve shows the spatial correspondence between the favorable area and the location of
known mineral occurrences. To plot the success rate curve, different threshold values
are determined from the MPM values in the predictive model. Then the proportion of
predicted mineral occurrences is compared with the proportion in the favorable area [2].
As shown in Figure 15, the success rate curves for both the IForest and DIF models
exceed the gauge line, indicating that both predictive models have successfully established
a positive relationship with known mineral occurrences. The curve associated with the
prospectivity model derived from the DIF method performs better, compared to the IFor-
est model. This demonstrates that the DIF method is better able to identify non-linear
and complex anomalies associated with mineralization and highlights its effectiveness in
mapping prospectivity.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 19 of 24

Figure 15. Success rate curves for the IForest and DIF prospectivity models.

7. Discussion
Unsupervised anomaly detection algorithms provide a reliable method for identifying
zones of high mineralization potential during MPM, especially in greenfields where labeled
data is unavailable [20]. These algorithms do not suffer from the challenges associated
with data-driven supervised MPM methods, which arise from the inherent characteristics
of geospatial datasets and the rarity of mineralization [12]. Unsupervised techniques can
work without a ground truth sample, in contrast to data-driven supervised methods, which
can be hampered by the rarity of mineralization events and rely largely on well-defined
training datasets. The reliability of the prospectivity models produced is increased and the
uncertainty associated with the model results is greatly reduced by this independence from
labeled data.
The application of these algorithms is a suitable option for creating mineral potential
models and increasing the success rate in determining exploration targets. These algo-
rithms do not require negative ground truth samples, which significantly reduces the
uncertainty in prospectivity modelling. In this study, we applied unsupervised anomaly
detection algorithms that are capable of processing complicated exploration datasets with
high dimensions. The Feizabad region is a suitable location for hydrothermal copper min-
eralization, due to its geological and tectonic conditions. This area was selected as a case
study. Initially, 14 evidence layers were created, based on the mineralization characteristics
(Figures 8–12).
Mineralization is a local geological event with a low probability of occurrence, making
it an anomaly. For MPM studies, geospatial datasets are generated based on the min-
eralization features sought in the study area. As high values in certain evidence layers
typically correlate with some known mineral occurrences, anomaly detection techniques
are especially well suited to this type of study. The case study demonstrates that the IForest
and DIF methods can be utilized to map areas with high potential for mineralization. Both
methods exhibited good performance in identifying promising areas. However, the DIF
method outperformed the IForest algorithm, which may be attributed to its ability to expose
and recognize hard anomalies associated with mineralization.
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 20 of 24

The ability of the DIF method to identify known mineral occurrences that the ba-
sic IForest prospectivity model could not detect demonstrates its superiority over the
IForest algorithm. This difference draws attention to one of the main advantages of the
DIF algorithm, namely due to its neural network-based architecture, it can handle high-
dimensional data and process the complex and non-linear features that often characterize
mineralization patterns. The IForest algorithm may struggle to deal with the complexity
of geological data and may miss important anomalies, despite being simpler and more
computationally intensive.
Although both methods can detect potential areas of mineralization, each of them has
limitations. The IForest algorithm might struggle to model complex, non-linear behavior
when the dataset is highly intricate, leading to the loss of promising areas. This means
that the technique may not fully capture the complexity of the data, especially in areas
where the footprints of mineralization are weak. Conversely, the DIF approach has its
own difficulties, mostly related to the optimization of the hyperparameters, even though
it is better at handling complicated datasets. Extensive experimentation is required to
determine the best settings for the hyperparameters, which can have a large impact on how
accurate the prospectivity models are.
Even though unsupervised techniques, such as IForest and DIF, do not require labeled
datasets, the quality level and applicability of the input evidence layers are still very
important. These algorithms only work under the assumption that the evidence layers
they use are reliable markers for mineralization. Even the most advanced algorithms will
not be able to produce useful and accurate prospectivity maps if the input data is of poor
quality or does not accurately reflect the mineralization processes. Consequently, careful
layer selection and evidence preparation are crucial workflows.
Our research validates the use of unsupervised anomaly detection methods during
MPM, especially in areas where data limitations may make typical supervised approaches
impractical. In particular, the DIF algorithm has potential due to its sophisticated manage-
ment of complicated and non-linear interactions, giving it a major advantage over simpler
techniques such as the IForest algorithm. The limitations of these methods must be carefully
considered before using them in practice, especially with regard to the quality of the input
data and the adjustment of the hyperparameters. Subsequent studies should focus on
improving these approaches, possibly by developing more automated hyperparameter
optimization procedures and by investigating strategies to improve the comprehensibility
of the models.

8. Conclusions
The application of unsupervised anomaly detection techniques, including Isolation
Forest (IForest) and Deep Isolation Forest (DIF), has proven effective in mineral prospec-
tivity mapping (MPM) for polymetallic deposits. By using high-dimensional geospatial
datasets without requiring labeled data, these algorithms overcome many challenges as-
sociated with traditional supervised methods, particularly in regions with limited positive
samples and complex mineralization styles. Both IForest and DIF successfully identified
areas of high mineralization potential in the Feizabad area. However, DIF outperformed
IForest, particularly in regions where geo-logical patterns are more intricate and non-linear.
Its ability to use neural networks to model these complexities enabled better detection
of mineralization zones that IForest missed. The success rate curves further validated
the superior performance of DIF, making it a more effective tool for mapping potential
mineral deposits. The integration of proximity to hydrothermal alteration zones, intrusive
rocks, and fault intersections significantly enhanced the accuracy of the models. Remote
sensing da-ta, such as ASTER imagery, provided valuable input for identifying alteration
zones like argillic, phyllic, and propylitic areas, all of which played critical roles in defining
high-potential mineral zones. Additionally, proximity to fault intersections and intrusive
rocks provided key evidence layers that further refined the prospectivity models. Despite
the superior performance of DIF, careful attention to hyperparameter optimi-zation remains
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 21 of 24

essential for maximizing the accuracy of these models. While DIF shows promise for both
greenfield and brownfield exploration, its success depends heavily on the quality of input
data and the proper tuning of algorithm parameters.
In conclusion, unsupervised algorithms like DIF offer a flexible, scalable, and accurate
approach to MPM, especially in complex geological environments. These methods can be
adapted to various deposit types and exploration scenarios, making them invaluable tools
for the discovery of new mineral resources.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., Z.H.; methodology, M.S.,

S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M.; software, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., Z.H.; validation, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M.,
A.M.; formal analysis, M.S., S.M.B.G.; investigation, M.S., S.M.B.G.; resources, M.S., S.M.B.G.,
S.A.A.S.M.; data curation, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., A.B.P., Z.H.; writing original draft prepa-
ration, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., Z.H.; writing review and editing, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M.,
A.B.P., N.E.H., S.R., H.R., B.Z., Z.H.; visualization, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., A.B.P.; supervision,
M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., A.B.P., A.M.; project administration, M.S., S.M.B.G., S.A.A.S.M., A.B.P.,
Z.H., A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: We would like to thank the Department of Mining Engineering, Amirkabir
University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic University). The Institute of Oceanography and Envi-
ronment (INOS), the Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (UMT), and the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM)
are also thanked for their assistance in editing, rewriting, revising, and re-organizing the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Yousefi, M.; Carranza, E.J.M.; Kreuzer, O.P.; Nykänen, V.; Hronsky, J.M.; Mihalasky, M.J. Data analysis methods for prospectivity
modelling as applied to mineral exploration targeting: State-of-the-art and outlook. J. Geochem. Explor. 2021, 229, 106839.
[CrossRef]
2. Nykänen, V.; Groves, D.; Ojala, V.; Eilu, P.; Gardoll, S. Reconnaissance-scale conceptual fuzzy-logic prospectivity modelling for
iron oxide copper–gold deposits in the northern Fennoscandian Shield, Finland. Aust. J. Earth Sci. 2008, 55, 25–38. [CrossRef]
3. Abedi, M.; Kashani, S.B.M.; Norouzi, G.-H.; Yousefi, M. A deposit scale mineral prospectivity analysis: A comparison of various
knowledge-driven approaches for porphyry copper targeting in Seridune, Iran. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 2017, 128, 127–146. [CrossRef]
4. Parsa, M.; Pour, A.B. A simulation-based framework for modulating the effects of subjectivity in greenfield mineral prospectivity
mapping with geochemical and geological data. J. Geochem. Explor. 2021, 229, 106838. [CrossRef]
5. Behera, S.; Panigrahi, M.K. Gold prospectivity mapping in the Sonakhan Greenstone Belt, Central India: A knowledge-driven
guide for target delineation in a region of low exploration maturity. Natural Resources Research 2021, 30, 4009–4045. [CrossRef]
6. Saremi, M.; Yousefi, S.; Yousefi, M. Combination of geochemical and structural data to determine the exploration target of copper
hydrothermal deposits in the Feizabad district. J. Min. Environ. 2024, 15, 1089–1101.
7. Sun, T.; Li, H.; Wu, K.; Chen, F.; Zhu, Z.; Hu, Z. Data-driven predictive modelling of mineral prospectivity using machine learning
and deep learning methods: A case study from southern Jiangxi Province, China. Minerals 2020, 10, 102. [CrossRef]
8. Lou, Y.; Liu, Y. Mineral prospectivity mapping of tungsten polymetallic deposits using machine learning algorithms and
comparison of their performance in the Gannan region, China. Earth Space Sci. 2023, 10, e2022EA002596. [CrossRef]
9. Hajihosseinlou, M.; Maghsoudi, A.; Ghezelbash, R. Stacking: A novel data-driven ensemble machine learning strategy for
prediction and mapping of Pb-Zn prospectivity in Varcheh district, west Iran. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024, 237, 121668. [CrossRef]
10. Xiong, Y.; Zuo, R.; Carranza, E.J.M. Mapping mineral prospectivity through big data analytics and a deep learning algorithm. Ore
Geol. Rev. 2018, 102, 811–817. [CrossRef]
11. Yin, B.; Zuo, R.; Sun, S. Mineral Prospectivity Mapping Using Deep Self-Attention Model. Nat. Resour. Res. 2023, 32, 37–56.
[CrossRef]
12. Mirzabozorg, S.A.A.S.; Abedi, M. Recognition of mineralization-related anomaly patterns through an autoencoder neural network
for mineral exploration targeting. Appl. Geochem. 2023, 158, 105807. [CrossRef]
13. Zhang, S.; Carranza, E.J.M.; Xiao, K.; Wei, H.; Yang, F.; Chen, Z.; Li, N.; Xiang, J. Mineral prospectivity mapping based on isolation
forest and random forest: Implication for the existence of spatial signature of mineralization in outliers. Nat. Resour. Res. 2022, 31,
1981–1999. [CrossRef]
14. Abedi, M.; Norouzi, G.-H.; Bahroudi, A. Support vector machine for multi-classification of mineral prospectivity areas. Comput.
Geosci. 2012, 46, 272–283. [CrossRef]
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 22 of 24

15. Saljoughi, B.S.; Hezarkhani, A. A comparative analysis of artificial neural network (ANN), wavelet neural network (WNN), and
support vector machine (SVM) data-driven models to mineral potential mapping for copper mineralizations in the Shahr-e-Babak
region, Kerman, Iran. Appl. Geomat. 2018, 10, 229–256. [CrossRef]
16. Ghasemzadeh, S.; Maghsoudi, A.; Yousefi, M.; Kreuzer, O. Spatially weighted singularity mapping in conjunction with random
forest algorithm for mineral prospectivity modeling. Int. J. Min. Geo-Eng. 2023, 57, 455–460.
17. Ghezelbash, R.; Maghsoudi, A.; Carranza, E.J.M. Optimization of geochemical anomaly detection using a novel genetic K-means
clustering (GKMC) algorithm. Comput. Geosci. 2020, 134, 104335. [CrossRef]
18. Agha Seyyed Mirzabozorg, S.; Abedi, M.; Ahmadi, F. Clustering of Areas Prone to Iron Mineralization in Esfordi Range based on
a Hybrid Method of Knowledge-and Data-Driven Approaches. J. Miner. Resour. Eng. 2023, 8, 1–26.
19. Yousefi, M.; Kreuzer, O.P.; Nykänen, V.; Hronsky, J.M. Exploration information systems—A proposal for the future use of GIS in
mineral exploration targeting. Ore Geol. Rev. 2019, 111, 103005. [CrossRef]
20. Chen, Y.; Wu, W. Mapping mineral prospectivity by using one-class support vector machine to identify multivariate geological
anomalies from digital geological survey data. Aust. J. Earth Sci. 2017, 64, 639–651. [CrossRef]
21. Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Zhao, Q.; Sun, G. Detection of multivariate geochemical anomalies using the bat-optimized isolation forest
and bat-optimized elliptic envelope models. J. Earth Sci. 2021, 32, 415–426. [CrossRef]
22. Chen, Y.; Wu, W.; Zhao, Q. A bat-optimized one-class support vector machine for mineral prospectivity mapping. Minerals 2019,
9, 317. [CrossRef]
23. Xiong, Y.; Zuo, R. Recognizing multivariate geochemical anomalies for mineral exploration by combining deep learning and
one-class support vector machine. Comput. Geosci. 2020, 140, 104484. [CrossRef]
24. Wang, J.; Zhou, Y.; Xiao, F. Identification of multi-element geochemical anomalies using unsupervised machine learning
algorithms: A case study from Ag–Pb–Zn deposits in north-western Zhejiang, China. Appl. Geochem. 2020, 120, 104679. [CrossRef]
25. Liu, F.T.; Ting, K.M.; Zhou, Z.-H. Isolation forest. In Proceedings of the 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data
Mining, Pisa, Italy, 15–19 December 2008; pp. 413–422.
26. Liu, F.T.; Ting, K.M.; Zhou, Z.-H. Isolation-based anomaly detection. ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data (TKDD) 2012, 6, 1–39.
[CrossRef]
27. Lesouple, J.; Baudoin, C.; Spigai, M.; Tourneret, J.-Y. Generalized isolation forest for anomaly detection. Pattern Recognit. Lett.
2021, 149, 109–119. [CrossRef]
28. Chen, Y.; Wu, W. Isolation forest as an alternative data-driven mineral prospectivity mapping method with a higher data-
processing efficiency. Nat. Resour. Res. 2019, 28, 31–46. [CrossRef]
29. Tchaghe, V.Y. Contribution to Anomaly Detection and Explanation; Université de Rennes: Rennes, France, 2023.
30. Xu, H.; Pang, G.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y. Deep isolation forest for anomaly detection. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2023, 35,
12591–12604. [CrossRef]
31. Epsteins, M.; Forsström, F. Finding Known and Novel Errors in Heat Pumps Using Unsupervised ML. Master’s Thesis, Lund
University, Lund, Sweden, 2024.
32. Barrish, D.; van Vuuren, J. A taxonomy of univariate anomaly detection algorithms for predictive maintenance. S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng.
2023, 34, 28–42. [CrossRef]
33. Behroozi, A. Geological Map of Iran 1: 100,000 Series, Feizabad; Geological Survey of Iran: Tehran, Iran, 1987.
34. Daviran, M.; Maghsoudi, A.; Cohen, D.R.; Ghezelbash, R.; Yilmaz, H. Assessment of various fuzzy c-mean clustering validation
indices for mapping mineral prospectivity: Combination of multifractal geochemical model and mineralization processes. Nat.
Resour. Res. 2020, 29, 229–246. [CrossRef]
35. Hu, D.; Liu, D.; Xue, S. Explanatory Text of Geochemical Map of Feizabad (7760); Geological Survey of Iran: Tehran, Iran, 1995.
36. Daviran, M.; Maghsoudi, A.; Ghezelbash, R.; Pradhan, B. A new strategy for spatial predictive mapping of mineral prospectivity:
Automated hyperparameter tuning of random forest approach. Comput. Geosci. 2021, 148, 104688. [CrossRef]
37. Yousefi, M.; Hronsky, J.M. Translation of the function of hydrothermal mineralization-related focused fluid flux into a mappable
exploration criterion for mineral exploration targeting. Appl. Geochem. 2023, 149, 105561. [CrossRef]
38. Pour, A.B.; Hashim, M. Identification of hydrothermal alteration minerals for exploring of porphyry copper deposit using ASTER
data, SE Iran. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2011, 42, 1309–1323. [CrossRef]
39. Saremi, M.; Maghsoudi, A.; Ghezelbash, R.; Yousefi, M.; Hezarkhani, A. Targeting of porphyry copper mineralization using a
continuous-based logistic function approach in the Varzaghan district, north of Urumieh-Dokhtar magmatic arc. J. Min. Environ.
2024. [CrossRef]
40. Yousefi, M.; Kamkar-Rouhani, A.; Carranza, E.J.M. Geochemical mineralization probability index (GMPI): A new approach
to generate enhanced stream sediment geochemical evidential map for increasing probability of success in mineral potential
mapping. J. Geochem. Explor. 2012, 115, 24–35. [CrossRef]
41. Elhussein, M.; Shokry, M. Use of the airborne magnetic data for edge basalt detection in Qaret Had El Bahr area, Northeastern
Bahariya Oasis, Egypt. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2020, 79, 4483–4499. [CrossRef]
42. Elhussein, M. A novel approach to self-potential data interpretation in support of mineral resource development. Nat. Resour. Res.
2021, 30, 97–127. [CrossRef]
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 23 of 24

43. Aali, A.A.; Shirazy, A.; Shirazi, A.; Pour, A.B.; Hezarkhani, A.; Maghsoudi, A.; Hashim, M.; Khakmardan, S. Fusion of remote
sensing, magnetometric, and geological data to identify polymetallic mineral potential zones in Chakchak Region, Yazd, Iran.
Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 6018. [CrossRef]
44. Saremi, M.; Hoseinzade, Z.; Mirzabozorg, S.A.A.S.; Pour, A.B.; Zoheir, B.; Almasi, A. Integrated remote sensing and geochemical
studies for enhanced prospectivity mapping of porphyry copper deposits: A case study from the Pariz district, Urmia-Dokhtar
metallogenic belt, southern Iran. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2024, 36, 101343. [CrossRef]
45. Shirazi, A.; Hezarkhani, A.; Beiranvand Pour, A.; Shirazy, A.; Hashim, M. Neuro-Fuzzy-AHP (NFAHP) technique for copper
exploration using Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) and geological datasets in the
Sahlabad mining area, east Iran. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 5562. [CrossRef]
46. Yousefi, M.; Nykänen, V.; Harris, J.; Hronsky, J.M.; Kreuzer, O.P.; Bertrand, G.; Lindsay, M. Overcoming survival bias in targeting
mineral deposits of the future: Towards null and negative tests of the exploration search space, accounting for lack of visibility.
Ore Geol. Rev. 2024, 172, 106214. [CrossRef]
47. Saremi, M.; Yousefi, M.; Yousefi, S. Separation of geochemical anomalies related to hydrothermal copper mineralization using
staged factor analysis in Feyzabad geological map. J. Anal. Numer. Methods Min. Eng. 2023, 14, 35–44. (In Persian)
48. Pour, A.B.; Hashim, M. The application of ASTER remote sensing data to porphyry copper and epithermal gold deposits. Ore
Geol. Rev. 2012, 44, 1–9. [CrossRef]
49. Pour, A.B.; Hashim, M.; Marghany, M. Characterization of ASTER Data for Mineral Exploration. In Proceedings of the MRSS 6th
International Remote Sensing & GIS Conference and Exhibition, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 28–29 April 2010; pp. 28–29.
50. Atif, Y.; Soulaimani, A.; Ait lamqadem, A.; Pour, A.B.; Pradhan, B.; Nouamane, E.A.; Abdelali, K.; Muslim, A.M.; Hossain, M.S.
Identifying hydrothermally altered rocks using ASTER satellite imageries in Eastern Anti-Atlas of Morocco: A case study from
Imiter silver mine. Int. J. Image Data Fusion 2022, 13, 337–361. [CrossRef]
51. Yousefi, M.; Nykänen, V. Data-driven logistic-based weighting of geochemical and geological evidence layers in mineral
prospectivity mapping. J. Geochem. Explor. 2016, 164, 94–106. [CrossRef]
52. Bauw, M.; Velasco-Forero, S.; Angulo, J.; Adnet, C.; Airiau, O. From unsupervised to semi-supervised anomaly detection methods
for HRRP targets. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Radar Conference (RadarConf20), Florence, Italy, 21–25 September 2020;
pp. 1–6.
53. Zheng, C.; Zhao, Q.; Fan, G.; Zhao, K.; Piao, T. Comparative study on isolation forest, extended isolation forest and generalized
isolation forest in detection of multivariate geochemical anomalies. Glob. Geol. 2023, 26, 167–176.
54. Stradiotti, L.; Perini, L.; Davis, J. Semi-Supervised Isolation Forest for Anomaly Detection. In Proceedings of the 2024 SIAM
International Conference on Data Mining (SDM), Houston, TX, USA, 18–20 April 2024; pp. 670–678.
55. Kittidachanan, K.; Minsan, W.; Pornnopparath, D.; Taninpong, P. Anomaly detection based on GS-OCSVM classification. In
Proceedings of the 2020 12th International Conference on Knowledge and Smart Technology (KST), Pattaya, Thailand, 29
January–1 February 2020; pp. 64–69.
56. Fadul, A.M.A. Anomaly Detection based on Isolation Forest and Local Outlier Factor. Master’s Thesis, Africa University, Mutare,
Zimbabwe, 2023.
57. Ma, M.Q.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, X.; Akoglu, L. The need for unsupervised outlier model selection: A review and evaluation of internal
evaluation strategies. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 2023, 25, 19–35. [CrossRef]
58. Chen, H.; Ma, H.; Chu, X.; Xue, D. Anomaly detection and critical attributes identification for products with multiple operating
conditions based on isolation forest. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2020, 46, 101139. [CrossRef]
59. Cao, Y.; Xiang, H.; Zhang, H.; Zhu, Y.; Ting, K.M. Anomaly Detection Based on Isolation Mechanisms: A Survey. arXiv 2024,
arXiv:2403.10802.
60. Govett, G. The development of geochemical exploration methods and techniques. In Developments in Economic Geology; Elsevier:
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1976; Volume 3, pp. 343–376.
61. Ghasemzadeh, S.; Maghsoudi, A.; Yousefi, M.; Mihalasky, M.J. Stream sediment geochemical data analysis for district-scale
mineral exploration targeting: Measuring the performance of the spatial U-statistic and CA fractal modeling. Ore Geol. Rev. 2019,
113, 103115. [CrossRef]
62. Yousefi, M.; Kamkar-Rouhani, A.; Carranza, E.J.M. Application of staged factor analysis and logistic function to create a fuzzy
stream sediment geochemical evidence layer for mineral prospectivity mapping. Geochem. Explor. Environ. Anal. 2014, 14, 45–58.
[CrossRef]
63. Habashi, J.; Jamshid Moghadam, H.; Mohammady Oskouei, M.; Pour, A.B.; Hashim, M. PRISMA Hyperspectral Remote Sensing
Data for Mapping Alteration Minerals in Sar-e-Châh-e-Shur Region, Birjand, Iran. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 1277. [CrossRef]
64. Hajaj, S.; El Harti, A.; Jellouli, A.; Pour, A.B.; Himyari, S.M.; Hamzaoui, A.; Hashim, M. ASTER data processing and fusion for
alteration minerals and silicification detection: Implications for cupriferous mineralization exploration in the western Anti-Atlas,
Morocco. Artif. Intell. Geosci. 2024, 5, 100077. [CrossRef]
65. Sheikhrahimi, A.; Pour, A.B.; Pradhan, B.; Zoheir, B. Mapping hydrothermal alteration zones and lineaments associated with
orogenic gold mineralization using ASTER data: A case study from the Sanandaj-Sirjan Zone, Iran. Adv. Space Res. 2019, 63,
3315–3332. [CrossRef]
66. Ghasemzadeh, S.; Maghsoudi, A.; Yousefi, M.; Mihalasky, M.J. Recognition and incorporation of mineralization-efficient fault
systems to produce a strengthened anisotropic geochemical singularity. J. Geochem. Explor. 2022, 235, 106967. [CrossRef]
Minerals 2024, 14, 1015 24 of 24

67. Nykänen, V.; Lahti, I.; Niiranen, T.; Korhonen, K. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) as validation tool for prospectivity
models—A magmatic Ni–Cu case study from the Central Lapland Greenstone Belt, Northern Finland. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 71,
853–860. [CrossRef]
68. Zuo, R.; Wang, Z. Effects of random negative training samples on mineral prospectivity mapping. Nat. Resour. Res. 2020, 29,
3443–3455. [CrossRef]
69. Pedregosa, F. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python Fabian. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2011, 12, 2825.
70. Zhao, Y.; Nasrullah, Z.; Li, Z. Pyod: A python toolbox for scalable outlier detection. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019, 20, 1–7.
71. Bigdeli, A.; Maghsoudi, A.; Ghezelbash, R. Recognizing geochemical anomalies associated with mineral resources using
singularity analysis and random forest models in the Torud-Chahshirin Belt, Northeast Iran. Minerals 2023, 13, 1399. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.