why geoinformatics? (the view of a working class geophysicist) g. randy keller - university of...

Why Geoinformatics?Why Geoinformatics?(The view of a working class geophysicist)(The view of a working class geophysicist)

G. Randy Keller - University of Oklahoma and G. Randy Keller - University of Oklahoma and

UTEP UTEP It is too hard to find and work with data that already exist, It is too hard to find and work with data that already exist,

and too much data is in effect lost.and too much data is in effect lost.

It is too hard to acquire software and make it work.It is too hard to acquire software and make it work.

We have too little access to modern IT tools that would We have too little access to modern IT tools that would accelerate scientific progress.accelerate scientific progress.

The result is too little time for science!The result is too little time for science!

To remedy this situation, a number of geoscience To remedy this situation, a number of geoscience groups are being supported by the National Science groups are being supported by the National Science

Foundation to develop the cyberinfrastructure neededFoundation to develop the cyberinfrastructure needed to move us forward.to move us forward.

Worldwide Earthquake EpicentersWorldwide Earthquake EpicentersA quick overview of a major scientific revolution

Volcanic ChainsVolcanic Chains

Mountain ChainsMountain Chains

Plates of the WorldPlates of the World

EarthScope Instrumentation• 3.2 km borehole into the

San Andreas Fault• 875 permanent GPS stations• 175 borehole strainmeters • 5 laser strainmeters• 39 Permanent seismic stations

• 400 transportable seismic stations occupying 2000 sites (”BigFoot”)

• 30 magneto-telluric systems• 100 campaign GPS stations• 2400 campaign seismic stations

(“LittleFoot”)

from Greg Van der Vink

GeoTraverse

An Integrated Geologic Framework for EarthScope’s USArray

http://tapestry.usgs.gov/

www.geongrid.orgCYBERINFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE GEOSCIENCES

•The Geosciences are a discipline that is strongly data drivenstrongly data driven, and large data sets are often developed by researchers and government agencies and disseminated widely.

•Geoscientists have a tradition of sharing of datatradition of sharing of data, but being willing to share data if asked or even maintaining a website accomplishes little. Also we have few mechanisms to share the work that has been done when a third party cleans up, reorganizes or embellishes an existing database.

•We waste a large amount of human capitalwaste a large amount of human capital in duplicative efforts and fall further behind by having no mechanism for existing databases to grow and evolve via community input.

•The goal is for data to evolve into information and then into knowledge as quickly and effectively as possible.

Some Thoughts About Data (sets, bases, systems)


A Scientific Effort Vector

Background Background ResearchResearch

Data Collection and Data Collection and CompilationCompilation

ScienceScience

Back-Back- groundground

ResearchResearch

Data Collection Data Collection and and

CompilationCompilationScienceScience

ScienceScience - Analysis, Modeling, Interpretation, Discovery


Data layers

DEM (USGS, SRTM)Geology (mostly 1:500,000)

Landsat 7 / ASTER

Magnetics Gravity

Petrology/Geochron. (e.g. NAVDAT)Drilling data (State surveys, USGS)

……….To get 3-D, start with To get 3-D, start with tomography: add gravity, tomography: add gravity, geologic interfaces, seismic geologic interfaces, seismic interfaces, ….interfaces, ….

Provide input Provide input to to

geodynamic geodynamic modelsmodels

Building a gravity data systemBuilding a gravity data systemMajor steps in the processMajor steps in the process::

• Build community support via workshops and annual meetings (AGU)Build community support via workshops and annual meetings (AGU)

•Determine what the community really needs and wants (e.g., base stations)Determine what the community really needs and wants (e.g., base stations)

•Work out interagency agreementsWork out interagency agreements

•Reach agreement on standardsReach agreement on standards

•Publish the resultsPublish the results

•Compile the data from as many sources as possibleCompile the data from as many sources as possible

•Undertake quality controlUndertake quality control

•Set up a web portal for dissemination of data and the uploading of new dataSet up a web portal for dissemination of data and the uploading of new data

•Develop new software as needed and add to a software toolboxDevelop new software as needed and add to a software toolbox

•Advertise the project and continuously seek inputAdvertise the project and continuously seek input

•Evolve as the field and situation changesEvolve as the field and situation changes

U.S. gravity database projectU.S. gravity database project

• Participants are UTEP, USGS, NGA, NOAA, and industry.Participants are UTEP, USGS, NGA, NOAA, and industry.• Approach is to initially compile gravity data for the Approach is to initially compile gravity data for the

conterminous U.S. by merging data primarily from the NGA, conterminous U.S. by merging data primarily from the NGA, NGS, USGS, and UTEP.NGS, USGS, and UTEP.

• Remove the duplicate pointsRemove the duplicate points• Remove bad points Remove bad points • Terrain correct the dataTerrain correct the data• Include base stations, analysis tools, and tutorialsInclude base stations, analysis tools, and tutorials

Data available in 1999 - ~900,000 stationsData available in 1999 - ~900,000 stations

Terrain corrected stations in the new databaseTerrain corrected stations in the new database

GeoNet InterfaceGeoNet Interface

Search Search EngineEngine

Search ResultsSearch Results


4-D Evolution of ContinentsThe Accretionary orogen perspective

--Plate Tectonics --Crustal Growth Through Time --Terranes --Terrane Recognition --Integration of Distributed Databases --Knowledge Representation of Domains --Domain Ontology --Databases --Data Providers

High Level

Data Level


Some examples of databases needed

Geological maps Faults Geochronology

Petrology/Geochemistry Gravity anomalies Magnetic anomalies

Stratigraphy Basin history Paleontology

Seismic images/crust Seismic images/mantle Physical properties

Stress indicators/equakes GPS vectors Paleoelevation

Paleomagnetic Metamorphic history DEM

Remote sensing ……….


Some examples of domain cybertools needed

Visualization -- 1 to 4-D

Domain modeling (processes, geometry)

Geodynamic modeling

Integration (visual and computational models)

Uncertainty and error propagation

……


TestbedsGEON GEON TestbeTestbe

dsdsScience Science ThemesThemes


Science ChallengesRocky Mountain Testbed

The Rocky Mountain region is the apex of a broad The Rocky Mountain region is the apex of a broad dynamic orogenic plateau that lies between the dynamic orogenic plateau that lies between the stable interior of North America and the active stable interior of North America and the active

plate margin along the west coast. plate margin along the west coast.

For the past 1.8 billion years, the Rocky Mountain For the past 1.8 billion years, the Rocky Mountain region has been the focus of repeated tectonic region has been the focus of repeated tectonic activity and has experienced complex intraplate activity and has experienced complex intraplate

deformation for the past 300 million years. deformation for the past 300 million years.

During the Phanerozoic, the main deformation During the Phanerozoic, the main deformation effects were the Ancestral Rocky Mountain effects were the Ancestral Rocky Mountain orogeny, the Laramide Orogeny, and late orogeny, the Laramide Orogeny, and late

Cenozoic uplift and extension that is still active. Cenozoic uplift and extension that is still active.

In each case, the processes involved are the In each case, the processes involved are the subject of considerable debate.subject of considerable debate.


Science QuestionsScience Questions

Rocky Mountain TestbedRocky Mountain Testbed

The nature or the processes that formed the continent during the The nature or the processes that formed the continent during the

ProterozoicProterozoicInfluence of old structures on the location and evolution of Influence of old structures on the location and evolution of

younger onesyounger onesWhat processes were at work during the numerous phases of What processes were at work during the numerous phases of

intraplate deformationintraplate deformationWhat caused the uplift of the mountains and high plateaus that What caused the uplift of the mountains and high plateaus that

are seen in this region todayare seen in this region todayWhat were the effects of mountain building on the distribution of What were the effects of mountain building on the distribution of

mineral, energy, and water resourcesmineral, energy, and water resources

What is the nature of interactions among Paleozoic, Laramide, What is the nature of interactions among Paleozoic, Laramide,

and late Cenozoic basinsand late Cenozoic basins


In the Proterozoic, a series of island arc and/or

oceanic terranes were accreted to the rifted

margin of the Archean Wyoming craton.

Following this period of accretion, extensive magmatism (1.4Ga)

spread across Laurentia and adjacent portions of Baltica probably creating

an extensive mafic underplate.

The following Grenville/Sveco-

norwegian orogeny largely completed the formation of

Rodinia.

Crustal Domains


The early/middle Paleozoic was a time of stability. Passive margins formed around the edges of Laurentia.

The late Paleozoic

Ancestral Rocky Mountain

orogeny included the Southern

Oklahoma aulacogen and

represents extensive

deformation of

the foreland.

Paleozoic


Isostatic residual map


SOA index


Crustal model derived by integrated analysis of

seismic, geologic, and gravity data


The Cordilleran orogenic plateau that includes the Southern Rocky Mountains can in part be traced back to Laramide time. Its

history is a continuing controversy.

Mid-Tertiary magmatism was

extensive.

Late Cenozoic extension (Basin and Range/Rio Grande

rift) followed the Laramide orogeny.

MesozoicCenozoic


Rio Grande Rift

Similar to Kenya rift in most respectsSimilar to Kenya rift in most respects

Deep (up to 7 km), linked basinsDeep (up to 7 km), linked basins Extension increases, crust thins, and Extension increases, crust thins, and elevation decreases from Colorado elevation decreases from Colorado southwardsouthward

Magmatism and magmatic modification of Magmatism and magmatic modification of the crust are minor the crust are minor if if “mid-Tertiary” volcanic “mid-Tertiary” volcanic centers are considered pre-rift centers are considered pre-rift

Deep crustal structure correlates well with Deep crustal structure correlates well with near-surface geologic manifestations near-surface geologic manifestations (symmetrical)(symmetrical)

Differences (volume of volcanism, amount Differences (volume of volcanism, amount of uplift?, mantle anomaly?)of uplift?, mantle anomaly?)

Depth to Depth to Moho Moho

(Crustal (Crustal Thickness)Thickness)


Isostatic residual map


Integrated lithospheric

model Albuquerque

area


LA RISTRA


SHEAR WAVE TOMOGRAPHYSHEAR WAVE TOMOGRAPHY

West et al. 2004West et al. 2004


Kenya vs

Rio Grande rifts


Thank You!

why geoinformatics? (the view of a working class geophysicist) g. randy keller - university of...

Documents

data driventhe geosciences

large data sets

vink slide

world slide

discovery slide

data layers dem usgs

volcanic chains slide

mountain chains slide