OneGeology-Europe – an INSPIRE testbed for semantic harmonisation of „geology“ data

across Europe (WP 3)

Kristine Asch and John Laxton

Project deliverables

• Interoperable on-shore geology spatial dataset

• with ”progress towards harmonisation”

• Geological vocabulary and data specifications for Europe

• Use case studies

• Mutilingual metadata for discovery

• View services• Forerunner and “guinea

pig” for the implementation of INSPIRE Directive

© BGR.deKristine Asch

Fact

Vast amount of data hidden in the archives and hard disks in governmental organisations across Europe …

Edge matching at national boundaries?

National National boundaryboundarygeological terms and geological terms and classificationsclassifications (age, (age, lithology, lithology, tectonicstectonics ..)..)age of data age of data (mapping (mapping campaigncampaign) ) choicechoice of units of units to be to be mappedmappedlevellevel of detail / scaleof detail / scaletopographicaltopographical basebase((projectionprojection, , spheroidspheroid, , drainagedrainage system, ...)system, ...)Portrayal (Portrayal (colourscolours and and symbolssymbols))MappedMapped borderborder of the of the unitsunits

And they are all different..

• Interoperability – when the data model/structure and properties to describe its parts (what GeoSciML does) is agreed

– E.g. agreeing a data model will have the feature of “GeologicUnit”with properties of “age” and “lithology”

• Semantic harmonisation – when the use of the same definitions and classifications to describe a concept/term is agreed

– E.g. ‘clay’. The same concept can be labelled with several terms (“argilla” in Italian, “Ton” in German), but needs to have the same definition, in this case of “clay/Ton/argilla, …”): > 50% particles < 0,004 mm (Wentworth grade scale), or: > 50% particles < 0,002 mm (ISO 14688)

• Geometric harmonisation – edge-matching at national boundaries

Interoperability and harmonisation

BasaltBasalt

BasaltBasalt

Semantic harmonisation

Geometric harmonisation

Alkali olivine basalt

Alkali Alkali olivine olivine basaltbasalt

BasaltBasaltBasalt

Harmonized?

Alkali Alkali olivine olivine basaltbasalt

BasaltBasaltBasalt

national boundary

BasaltBasaltBasalt

BasaltBasaltBasalt Harmonized!

interoperable

50 km50 km

The 1G-EGeology Vocabulary

• 516 agreed defined terms, definitions and parent/child relations:– lithology (sedimentary, magmatic, metamorphic)– geological age – genesis– faults and structures

• Taken on board: 532 review comments from 20 national data + 2 global NGOs

• > 100 new terms and definitions fed into the global geoscience vocabulary of the IUGS Commission of Geoscience Information

• Portrayal rules for age, lithology and structures• Explanatory Notes how to encode in GeoSciencel ML

►THE base for semantic harmonisation►Enables comparability of the information►Basis for cross-boundary planning

Portrayal Rulesvisualizing the content –

and its lack of harmonisation …

Vocabulary Building

Extract

Global CGIVocabulary

1GE-core Team

1GEuropescientificrequire-ments

1G-E Vocabulary

Review

DRAFTParticularilyEuropean(e.g. orogenies)

Vocabulary Challenges

• Agreement: 10 individual countryrepresentatives defining the vocabulary (terms and definitions)

• 20 national representatives reviewing• The (English) project Language – a

neverending source for misunderstanding• Integration with the global CGI vocabulary

group – many heated discussions via e-mail, phone and in meetings

• Short time available• Acceptance …. The need for a common

denominator was not seen by all project participants from the start

• 26 experts• 18 nations (EC)• 2 days

WP 3 GeologyHarmonisation Workshop, Slovenia

Tasks:• Define generic harmonisation issues • Solve these individually• Develop a workflow/method how to tackle this

Base: use of the 1G-E vocabulary

National boundarymismatches

Our 1st obstacle

Data gaps –no content

HarmonisationWorkshop issues

• Hardly any country has harmonised itsboundaries semantically and/or geometrically

• Political issues… who provides Gibraltar, Northern Ireland?

• Base problem: the difference of scales; target scale 1/1000.000 includes 1/250.000, 1/300.000, 1/400.000, 1/500 000, 1/625 000, 1/1 000 000 –> our advise: define the scale if there is a strong necessity for data harmonisation

• Many mismatches solvable by bilateral negotiation, by use of more detailed data sets/maps and publications

• However, there will mismatches remain that can only be solved with additional field work !

Geological harmonisation:Draft of a

general workflow processCondition: parties use same conceptual model and vocabulary

Identify and classify mismatches

Define properties to be harmonized

Inform neighbours and start negotiating process

Define level of harmonisation

Modify just identifiedborder polygonesModify general unit

Mark feature

Solvable by negotiation? yesno

Generalize semantic/snap boundaries

minor

major

Tools: Mismatch matrix

Expert group

Expert group

Mediator

Neighbours

Tools

Summary and Conclusions

• The work on the OneG-E data vocabulary enriched and improved the global CGI vocabulary

• It has been reviewed and agreed by 20+4 countries (subsidiarity principle)

• Provides a solid base, easy-to-use vocabulary to describe the geology of Europe

• Explanation notes are written to help the implementation• Provides a geology vocabulary and basis for semantic

harmonisation of geology in Europe • Reference material for the INSPIRE Geology and Mineral

Resources Data TWG GE-MR Specification TWG GE-MR….

• “progress-towards-harmonisation” report provides guidance for future cross-border consistency and harmonisation

Thanks to:

• Ian Jackson• Steve Richard, CGI• Garry Baker• Robert Tomas • Jean-Jacques Serrano• Agnès Tellez-Arenas• Marco Klicker• Horst Troppenhagen • Mikko Nironen• Urzula Stepien• Pjotr Czupek

• Francois Robida• Luca DeMicheli• Claudia Delfini• Aleksandra Kuczerawy• Alexander Tschistiakow• Stephan Gruijters• Mary Carter• Marco Pantaloni• Fernando Perez• Stefan Bergman• Stefan Kacer• Pavla Guertlerova

• Jolanta Cylene• Chris Schubert• Sybille Hennings• Kathryn Bull• Dominique Janjou• Milos Bavec• Alan Smith• Pierre-Yves Declerq• Monika • and many more of

the 1G-E Team …

Invitation to theIUGS-CGI

GeoScience Language Workshop+ Open GeoSciML Day

25.-27. August 2010Berlin

Topics:Ontologies, vocabularies and terms:

Developments and implementionRegistration:

Susanna.Koesterke@bgr.deKristine.Asch@bgr.de

Lessons learned

WP 3 HarmonisationWorkshop in Slovenia

Ouch, yes, I will do anything, I will even

HARMONIZE !! Aaaargh!!

“The classification of the sedimentary rocks is a problem on which much thought has been expended and one for which no mutually satisfactory or complete solution has yet been found" !!!!!

F. J. Pettijohn (1975)

More information on OneGeology-Europe

http://onegeology-Europe.org

More information on OneGeology (global)

http://onegeology.org

The 1G-E vocabulary in numbers

• 532 Review comments to the Scientific Data Specification D3.1 V1, 2009

Revised vocabulary 2010• 163 Lithology terms • 197 age terms• 82 Genesis terms

(42 environments + 40 processes)• 15 Orogenic Events • 12 Fault type terms • 11 Metamorphic Facies terms

• 6 Metamorphic Grade terms• 6 Proportion terms • 6 Geologic unit part role terms• 5 Contact type terms • 4 Geologic unit Type terms• 3 Geologic unit Morphology

terms• 2 Feature Observation Method

terms • 1 Mapped Feature Observation

Method term

agenda

• One Geology – Europe• Discrepancies• The vocabulary• The vocabulary by numbers• Building the vocabulary:

- develop requirements independently- scrutinizing global standards, extract- recognition and defining of gaps- merge

• The stony way to a global herd … examples• CGI multihierarchie contra single

• Challenges• Products

1G-E WP3 Vocabulary Sources

Bates, R.L. & Jackson, J.A. (1987): Glossary of Geology (3rd ed.). American Geological Institute; 788 p.; Alexandria, Virginia.

Bingen, B., et al. (2008): The Mesoproterozoic in the Nordic Countries.-Episodes, Vol. 31, 29-34; Journal of International Geoscience (Beijing)

Bucher & Frey (1994): Petrogenesis of Metamorphic Rocks; -7th ed.; Edition. – Springer (Heidelberg)

CGI IWG (in review 2008): Simple Lithology vocabulary - Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/ConceptDefinitionsTG

CGI IWG (in review 2010): Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/GeoSciML/vocabulary/trunk/2010LithologyRevisions/SimpleLithology2010_rc.rdf

Faure Maure, et al. in press: Devonian Geodynamic Evolution of the Variscan Belt, Insights from the French Massif Central and Massif Armoricain. Tectonics (Washington DC), in press.

Fettes, D. & Desmons, J. (2007): Metamorphic Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks; Cambridge University Press (Cambridge).

Fry, N. (1984): The Field Description of Metamorphic Rocks.- John Wiley & Son Ltd (London)

Gillespie, M.R. & Styles, M.T. (1999): BGS Rock Classification Scheme, Volume 1, Classification of igneous rocks.; British Geological Survey (Nottingham)

Hallsworth, C.R. & Know, R. W, 'B (1999):BGS Rock Classification Scheme. Volume 3: Classification of sediments and sedimentary rocks.- British Geological Survey; Keyworth, Nottingham.

Koistinen, T., Stephens, M.B., Bogatchev, V., Nordgulen, O., Wennerström, M., Korhonen, J., 2001. Geological map of Fennoscandian Shield, scale 1:2 000 000. Geological Surveys of Finland, Norway and Sweden and the North-West Department of Natural Resources of Russia

LeMaitre, R.W. et al. (2002): Igneous Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission on the Systematics of Igneous Rocks ; 2nd Edition.- Cambridge University Press (Cambridge).

LINNEMANN, U (2003): The structuraL units of Saxo-Thuringia.- Geologia Saxonia 48/49, 19-28;

Matte, P. 2001: The Variscan collage and orogeny (480±290 Ma) and the tectonic definition of the Armorica microplate: a review, Terra Nova 13, 122-128

McKerrow, W.S. Mac Niocaill, C. & Dewey, J.F. 2002: The Caledonian Orogeny redefined, Journal of the Geological Society 157, pp. 1149-1154; London.

Murawski, H. & Meyer, W. (1998): Geologisches Wörterbuch; 10., neu bearb. und erw. Aufl. – Enke (Stuttgard).

Igneous material of the CGI Vocabulary 2008plus new required 1G-E terms

phaneritic_igneous_rock

igneous_material

basic_igneous_rock

acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock

ultramafic_igneous_rock

fine_grained_igneous_rock

pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock

foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotitepyroxenite

hornblendite

quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoidrhyolitoid

foidolite

foid_syenitoid

basalt

anorthosite

gabbroic_rock

syenitic_rock

tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt

dioritic_rock

tonalitegranitegranodiorite

rhyolite

gabbro

monzo_gabbro

foid_bearing_syenitesyenitequartz_syenitemonzonite

quartz_monzonite

…

new 1G-E terms

CGI Simple Lithology 200811

ultrabasic_igneous_rock

phaneritic_igneous_rock

ultramafic_igneous_rock

fine_grain_igneous_rock

foid_syenite

syenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotite

rhyolitoid

basalt

anorthosite

gabbroic_rock

monzo_gabbro

foid_bearing_syenite

quartz_syenite

quartz_monzonite

dioritoid

igneous_material

basic_igneous_rock

acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock

ultramafic_igneous_rock

fine_grained_igneous_rock

foid_dioritoid

foidolitefoid_monzosyenitefoid_syenitoid

pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock

gabbroid

pyroxenite

hornblendite

quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoid

… basalt…

foid_dioritefoid_monzodiorite

foid_bearing_anorthositequartz_anorthosite

monzogabbroic_rockalkali_feldspar_syenitic_rocksyenitic_rockmonzonitic_rockfoid_monzogabbrofoid_gabbro

tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt

alkali_feldspar_granitetonalitegranitegranodioritemonzodioritic_rockdioritic_rockalkali_feldspar_rhyoliterhyolite

…

gabbroquartz_gabbrofoid_bearing_gabbromonzo_gabbro

foid_bearing_syenitesyenitequartz_syenitemonzonite

quartz_monzonite

foid_bearing_monzonite

syenogranitemonzogranite…

…

…

1G-E vocabulary as part of the new Vocabulary of CGI (Simple Lithology 201001)

phaneritic_igneous_rock

foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotitepyroxenite

hornblendite

quartz_rich_phaneriticgranitoidrhyolitoid

gabbroic_rock

syenite

dioritoid

…

igneous_material

basic_igneous_rock

acidic_igneous_rockigneous_rock

foidolite

foid_syenitoid

pegmatiteapliteanorthositic_rock

anorthosite

syenitic_rock

tonalitegranitegranodiorite

dioritic_rock

gabbro

phaneritic_igneous_rock

ultramafic_igneous_rock

fine_grained_igneous_rock

foid_syenitesyenitoidfoid_gabbroidperidotite

rhyolitoid

basalt

anorthosite

gabbroic_rock

tholeiitic_basaltalkali_olivine_basalt

rhyolite

monzo_gabbro

foid_bearing_syenite

quartz_syenitemonzonite

quartz_monzonite

dioritoid

proposed changes for definitions by 1G-E

new 1G-E terms

CGI Simple Lithology 200811

Example Arenite

Arenite (1G-E):Clastic sandstone that contains less than 10 percent matrix. Matrix is mud-size silicate

minerals (clay, feldspar, quartz, rock fragments, and alteration products) of detrital or diagenetic nature.

Pettijohn, Potter, Siever, 1972, Sand and Sandstone: New York, Springer Verlag, 681 p..

Arenite:A general name used for consolidated sedimentary rocks composed of sand-sized fragments

with a pure or nearly pure chemical cement and little or no interstitial matrix material ; e.g. sandstone, graywacke, arkose, calcarenite. The term is equivalent to the Greek-derived term psammite and was introduced as arenyte by Grabau (1904, p.242) who used it with appropriate prefixes in classifying medium-grained rocks (e.g. “autoarenyte”, “autocalcarenyte”, “hydraarenyte” and “hydrosilicarenyte”). See also lutite, rudite.

A “clean” sandstone that is well sorted, contains little or no matrix material, and has relatively simple mineralogic composition; specif. a pure or nearly pure, chemically cemented sandstone containing <10% argillaceous matrix (Williams et. al., 1954, p.290). The term is used for major category of sandstone, as distinguished from wacke.

Neuendorf et al. 2005, American Geological Institute Alexandria, Virginia 2005, 35 p..

Grain sizes

BGS grain‐size scheme  (based on Wentworth, 1922) 

 

ISO 14688‐1, Geotechnical investigation  and testing –  Identification and classification of soil –  Part 1: Identification and description 

SGF 18, Karlsson and Hansbo, 1992  Jordarternas indelning och benämning (3rd Ed.), Byggforskningsrådet, Stockholm (1992). 

Aggregate name  [grain‐size in mm] 

  Aggregate name   [grain‐size in mm]  Aggregate name   [grain‐size in mm] 

    Coarse boulder  2000 ‐ … 

   

Boulde

r 

Medium boulder  600 ‐ 2000 

       

Large Boulder  630 ‐ … 

Coarse stone  200 ‐ 600 

    Boulder   200 – 630  Ston

e 

Medium stone  60 ‐ 200 

Boulders  256 ‐ … 

    Cobble  63 – 200     

Cobbles  64 ‐ 256    Coarse gravel  20 ‐ 63   Coarse Gravel  20 ‐ 60 

Pebbles  4 ‐ 64    Medium gravel  6,3 ‐ 20  Medium gravel  6 ‐ 20 

Gravel 

Granules  2 ‐ 4    Gravel 

Fine gravel  2,0 ‐ 6,3 

Gravel 

Fine gravel  2 ‐ 6 

Very‐coarse sand 

1 ‐ 2        

     

Coarse sand  0,5 ‐ 1    Coarse sand  0,63 ‐2,0  Coarse sand  0,6 ‐ 2 

Medium sand  0,25 ‐ 0,5    Medium sand  0,2 ‐ 0,63  Medium sand  0,2‐ 0,6 

Fine sand  0,125 ‐ 0,25   

Sand

 

Fine sand  0,063 ‐ 0,2 

Sand

 

Fine sand  0,06 ‐ 0,2 

Sand

 

Very fine sand  0,032 ‐ 0,125      Silt  0,004 ‐ 0,032    Coarse silt  0,02 ‐ 0,063  Coarse silt  0,02 ‐ 0,06 

        Medium silt  0,0063 ‐ 0,02  Medium silt  0,006 ‐ 0,02 

       

Silt 

Fine silt  0,002 ‐ 0,0063  Silt 

Fine silt  0,002 ‐ 0,006 Mud

 

Clay  … ‐ 0,004       Clay  … ‐ 0,002    Clay  … ‐ 0,002