2006 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks

Sheraton Vancouver Wall Centre Hotel, Vancouver, BC, Canada

July 16-21, 2006

Quantification o f Uncertainty in Mineral Prospectivity Prediction

Using Neural Network Ensembles and Interval Neutrosophic Sets
Pawalai Krai peerapun, Kok Wai Wong, Chun Che Fung, and Warick Brown
Abstract-Qnantification of unscrtalnty in mineral prospee
tivity predictinn is an important prncess tn support decisinfi
making In mineral exploration, D e p oF uncertainty can
identify lcvel of quality in thc prcdiction. This papcr proposes an
approach to predict d w e s of hvourability for gold deposits
together with quantification o f uncertainty in the prediction.
Geographic lnfurmatiun Systems (GIS) data is applied to the
integratinn of ensemble neural networks and interval neutmsophip w k Three difTewnt neural network architectufis we
uscd in this paper. The prcdiction and its unccrtainty arc
represented in t h e form of truth-membership, indeterminacymembership. and false-memkrship values, Two networks are
created for sash network architecturn to predict degrees of
favr)urahility for deposit and nnn depmit, which are represented
by truth add false memhership v.sloes wspectiuely. Uncertainty
or indeterminacy-mcmbcrship valucs am ~ s t i m a t dfrom both
trnth and false membership values. The results obtained using
different neural network ensemhle techniques are diwussed in
this paper.

Uncertainty estimation in mineral prospectivity prediction

is an important task i n order to support decision making in
regional-scale mineral exploration. I11 this pnper. we focus on
uncertainty of type vagueness in which it refers to boundaries
t h a t cannot be defined precisely. In [I]. vague objects are
separated into vague point, vague Tine, and vague region.
Dilo et al. [ I ] defined vague point as a finite set of disjoint
sites with known location. but the existence of the sites may
be uncertain.
This study involves gridded map layers in a GIs database,
each grid cell represents n site with a known location.
hut uncertain exiqtence of favourability for deposit. Hence.
this study deals with vague point. Some locations have
one hvndred percent of favourability for deposits. Some
locations have zero percent of favourability for mineral
deposits. Such cells are referred to as non-deposit or barren
cell?. Most locations have degrees of favourability between
these two extremes. Therefnre, each cell contains uncertain
information about the degree of favourability for deposits,
degree of favourability for hamns. and degree of indeterminable information or uncertainty. In order to store these
three types of information for each cell, we apply interval
htwalai Kraipccmpun is with the School of Information Tcchnolngy.
Murdoch University. Australia {emnil: p.kmipeenpun@rnurdoch.edu.~u)
Kok Wai Wong 1% with the School of Inforn~ationTechnology. Murdoch
University. Australia {elnail. k.wonp@murdoch.edu.su)
Chun Che Fung is with the Ccntrc for Enterprisc Collabmlion In Innovative Systems, Murdoch University, AusmIia (cmail:
I.fung@murdoch.cdu.;tul
Warick Brown is w~ththe Centre for Exploration Targeting. The Vniversiry of Western Australia, Australia (email: wbmwn@cyllenc.uwa.edu.au)
0-7803-9490-9/06/$20.00/2006 IEEE

neutrosophic sets [2] to keep these information in the form

of truth-membership, falsemembership, and indeterminacymembership values, respectively.
In recent years, neural network methods were found to
give ktler mineraI prospectivity prediction results than the
conventional empirical statistically-based methods 131. There
are various types of neural network used to predict degree
of favourability for mineral deposits. For example, Brown
et al. [ 3 ] , [4] applied backpropagation neural network for
mineral prospectivity prediction. Skabar [5] used a reedforward neural network to produce mineral potential maps.
Iyer et al. [6], [7] applied a general regression neural network
and a polynomial neural network to predict the favourability
for gold deposits. Fung ct al. [XI applied neural network
ensembles to the prediction of mineral prospectivity.
Hansen and Salarnon [91 suggested that ensembles of neuwl networks gives better results and less emr than a single
neural network. Ensembles of neural networks consist of two
steps: training of individual components in the ensembles and
combing the output from the component networks [lo]. This
study aims to apply neural network ensembles to predict the
degrees of favourability for gold deposits and also the degrees
of favwrability for barrens. These two degrees are then
used to estimate the degree of uncertainty in the prediction
for each grid cell on a mineral prospectivity map. Each
component of neural network ensembles applied in this study
consists of a pair of neural networks trained to predict degree
of Favourabi lity for deposits and degree of favourability
for barrens, respectively. We use three components in the
ensemble of neural networks. These component architecrures
are feed-forward backpmpagation neural network, general
regression neural network, and polynomial neural network.
These three are selected mainly because they have successful
application in the field.
A multilayer feed-forward neural network with backpropagation learning is applied in this study since it is suitable for
a large variety of applications. A general regression neural
network is a memory-based supervised feed-forward network
based on nonlinear regression theory. This network is not
necessary to define the number of hidden layers in advance
and has fast training time comparing to backpropagation
neural network [I I]. A polynomial neural network is based
on Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) [I21 which
identifies thc nonlinear relatiuns bctwecn input and output
variables. Similar to general regression neural network, a
topology of this network is not predetermined but developed
through learning [TI.
In order to combine the outputs obtained from components

3034

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

of ensemble neural networks, we propose and compare six

aggregation techniques which are based on majority vote,
averaging, and dynamic averaging techniques. Our proposed
techniques have applied the three membership values in the
aggregation instead of the truth-membership only as in most
conventional approaches.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section I1
presents interval neutrosophic sets used in this study. Section III explains the proposed model for the quantification
of uncertainty in the prediction of favourability for gold
deposits using interval neutrosophic sets and ensemble of
neural networks. Section IV explains the GIs data set used
in this paper. Experimental methodologies and results are
also presented in this section. Conclusions are explained in
section V.

Indeterminacy

Falsity BPNN

GRNN
GiS input data layers

Output

Falsity GRNN

11. INTERVAL NEUTROSOPHIC SETS

An interval neutrosophic set (INS) is an instance of

neutrosophic set [13] which is generalized from the concept of a classical set, fuzzy set, interval-valued fuzzy set,
intuitionistic fuzzy set, interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy
set, paraconsistent set, dialetheist set, paradoxist set, and
tautological set [2]. The membership of an element to the
interval neutrosophic set is expressed by three values: t ,i,
and f , which represent truth-membership, indetenninacymembership, and false-membership,respectively. These three
memberships are independent and can be any real sub-unitary
subsets. In some special cases, they can be dependent. In this
paper, the indeterminacy-membershipvalue depends on both
truth-membership and false membership values. The interval
neutrosophic set can represent several kinds of imperfection
such as imprecise, incomplete, inconsistent, and uncertain
information [14]. In this paper, we express imperfection in
the form of uncertainty of type vagueness. This research
follows the definition of an interval neutrosophic set that is
defined in [2]. This definition is described below.
Let X be a space of points (objects). An interval neutrosophic set in X is

where
TA is the truth-membership function,
IA is the indeterminacy-membership function, and
FA is the false-membership function.
The operations of interval neutrosophic sets are also applied in this paper. Details of the operations can be found
in [14].
111. UNCERTAINTY
ESTIMATION USING INTERVAL
NEUTROSOPHIC
SETSAND ENSEMBLE
NEURAL
NETWORKS
This paper applies GIs input data to ensemble neural networks for the prediction of favourability for gold deposits and

Output
Falsity PNN

Fig. I. Uncertainty model based on the integration of interval neutrosophic

sets and ensemble neural network

utilizes the interval neutrosophic set to express uncertainties

in the prediction. Fig. 1 shows our proposed model. The
input feature vectors of the proposed model represent values
from co-registered cells derived from GIs data layers which
are collected and preprocessed from the Kalgoorlie region of
Western Australia. The same input data set is used in every
neural network created in this paper.
In order to predict degrees of favourability for deposits,
we apply three types of neural network architecture: feedforward backpropagation neural network (BPNN), general
regression neural network (GRNN), and polynomial neural
neural network (PNN) for training individual network in the
ensembles. We create two neural networks for each neural
network architecture. The first network is used to predict
the degree of favourability for deposits (truth-membership
values) and another network is used to predict the degree
of favourability for barrens (false-membership values). Both
networks have the same architecture and are applied with
the same input feature data. The difference between these
two networks is that the second network trained to predict
degrees of favourability for barrens uses the complement of
target outputs used in the first network which is trained to
predict degrees of favourability for deposits. For example,
if the target output used to train the first network is 0.1, its
complement is 0.9. The results from these two networks are
used to analyze uncertainty in the prediction. If a cell has
high truth-membership value then this cell should have low
false-membership value and vise versa. Otherwise, this cell
contains high uncertainty. Hence, the degrees of uncertainty
in the prediction or indeterminacy-membership values can
be calculated as the difference between truth-membership
and false-membershipvalues. If the difference between truth-

3035

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

membership and false-membership is high then the nncertainty is low. In conmst, if the difference between both
values is Inw then the uncertainty is high.
In Fig. 1, the proposed neural network ensembles contain
t h ~ components
e
which each consists of a pair of neural
networks. The first pair is feed-forward backpropagation
neural networks (truth BPNN and falsity BPNN). The second
pair is general regression neural networks (truth GRNN
and falsity GRNN). The third pair is polynomial neural
networks ( n t h PNN and faIsity PNN3. Each pair of neural
networks is trained to predict degrees of favourability for deposits (truth-membership values) and degrees of favourability
for barrens (false-membership values). The indeterminacymembership values are calculated from the different between
truth-m~mbershipand fzlse-memhrship values. Therefore,
we have three interval neutrosophic sets which are outputs
from those three pairs of neural netwarks. We can define
these outputs as the following.
Let X j be the set of outputs from the neural netrvork.
In our case, we have three sets of outputs, i.e. XI,
X2and
representitag output sets from BPNN, GRNN and PNN
respectively. Each set Xjcontains the outputs from each pair
of the neural networks. The output set for BPNN is therefore
represented as Xr = {xlr,2 1 2 , .-.,.~ l i --.,
, xln} where s r f is
a cell in the output from the BPNN at Iwation i.
Let AT be an interval neutrosophic set of X j . A j can be
defined as

&.

where TAjis the truth (deposit) mernkrship function. I A is

j
the indeterminacy membership function. and FAJ is the false
(barren) membership function. After !he individual neural
network is trained and the three interval neutto5ophic sets
A, are created, the next step is to combine these three sets.
Instead of using only truth membership values to predict
the favourability for gold deposits. the f~llowingsare our
propused aggregation techniques using truth-membership,
false-membership, and indeterminacy-membership values,
1) Majority vote using T&F
For each internal neutrosophic set. A,, if a ccIl x
has truth-membership value TA~(X$
greater than a
threshold value then this cell is classified as deposit,
otherwise it is classified as barren. In this paper, we
use threshold values ranging from 0.1 to 0,9 in steps
of 0.1. If a cell has false-membership value FA,(x)
Iess than a threshold value then this cell is classified
as deposit, otherwise it is classified as barren. The
results calculated from the best threshold for truthmembership values and the results calculated fmm the
best threshold for false-membership values are then
calculated using the logical operator and to provide

the prediction results for each cell x i n each output Xj.

The degree of uncefiainty for each cell, is expressed by
the indeterminacy-membership value, I A j(x).
After the three outputs ate classified, the next step is
to combine these outputs. The majority vote is then
applied in order to aggregate the three outputs. For each
cell, if two or more outputs are classified as deposits
then the cell is deposit. Othewise, the cell is classified
as barren. The uncertainty value for each "deposit"
cell is estimated from the average indeterminacymembership value for all the neural nerwork pairs
in the ensemble that classified the input pattern as
a depsit. Likewise, uncertainty values for "barren"
celIs are calculated as the average of indeterminacymembership values from the members of the network
pairs that gave a classification of barren.
2) Majoriry vote using T > F
This technique is more flexible than the first technique.
The threshold value is not required for the prediction.
For every ccll i n each interval neutrosophic set A j , if
the truth-membership value is greater than the falsemembership value (TA$(x)
> FA~(X))
then the cell
is classified as deposit. Otherwise it is classified as
barren. The degree of uncertainty for each cell is
represented by the indeterminacy-membership value,
IA,(x). Similar to the first technique, the majority
vote is then used to combine the three outputs and
the indeteminacy-memkrship values are calculated
according to the predicted cell type for each individual
output.
31 Averaging using T&F
In this technique, the three interval neutrtlsophic sets
AJ, j = 1 , 2 , 3 are averaged. Let O be an averaged
output m p . O = {or, 0 2 , ...,o n ) where q is a cell ~f
the averaged output map at location i. Let Avg be an
interval neutrosophic set of the averaged output map
0. Avg can be calculated as follow

If a cell has averaged truth-memhrship value TA,,(o)

greater than a threshold value then this cell is classified
as deposit, otherwise the cell is classified as barren. If a
cell has averaped false-membership value F A ~ J Oless
)
than a threshold value then this cell is classified as deposit, otherwise this cell is classified as barsen. Similar
to the first technique, the logical operator and is used
to calculate the prediction from the results obtained
from the best threshold for buth truth-membership and
false-membership values. The degree of unceflainty is
expmswd by the averaged indeterminacy-memkrship
value I A (0).
~ ~
4) Averaging using T > F
In this technique. the three interval neutrosophic sets
are also averaged and the results are stored in Avg. if
the averaged truth-membership value is greater than the

3036

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

averaged false-~nernbershipvalue .T.;-T;l,?,(o):r F.;-T;l,,,(o)

then the cell is clnssified as deposit. Otherwise the cell
is classified as barr.en. The degree of iincertninty for
eac I1 cell is repr.esented by the averaged i~~rletesminacy
iilerribersllip value T.,A,,,(O).
5 ) Dynamic nver.nging using 'I'k 1.'
Illstead of using equal weight averaginp. tliis tecliniqiie uscs dynan~icweight averaging in which the
weight is the co~riple~nent
of the uncertainty value or
indeterminacy-~nernbership value for eacli cell. Irnccrtainty is integrated into truth-rnernbership and falseinernbership values to supporq the co~lfidericeof the
prediction. Lct Y he a d y ~ a m i caveraged outpi~tInnp.
Y = { g L ? U,.,,,
2 gIL) where 3~ is a cell of dynamic
averaged outpi~tat locntio~iE. Lct D he an interval
neutrosophic set of the dyrlari~icaveraged outpi~tY. II
call be defined as follow

used ten layers in raster-format to create input feature vecto~.s

for wr nod el. These layers reprwent different ~ ~ r i a b l e s
sucli as favourability of host rnckc, distance to the nearest
regional-scale fault, and distarice to the nearest irlagnetic
noomnly. Encli layer- is divided illto a gsicl of sqilnrc cells of
100 111 side. IIcncc, the ]nap arca contnios 1.254.00Q cells.
Each ccll stores a single attribute value which is scaled to
the rangc [0, I]. For exarnple. a ccll in a layer- representing
the distarice to the nearest fault contaios a value of distarice
scaled t o the raLlgc [O, 11. Each single grid cell is also
classified into deposit or' barren cell. The cells containing
greatel- than 1.000 kg total contained gold arc, labeled as
deposits. All other cells atc classified as non-deposits or
barren cells. In this pnpcr. wc list: 268 cells which atc
separated into 120 deposit cells and 148 barren cells. These
cells arc divided into tsainitig and test dnta sets. L k iisc 85
deposit cells and 102 barren cells fortsninitig data. Fur testing
data, w~ usc: 35 deposit cells and 16 barren cells.

In tliis pnpcr. two pnirs of neural networks trained using

feed-forwal-d backpropagatio~~neural ~ieiwork and penenl
regrecsion neural tietwork are created using Matlah. .4 pair
ut polynomial ncural networks I S traincd using P K N onlincsoft\vnrc dcvclupcd by Tctko ct al [15]. Each pair of ncurrtl
networks is rrnincd to predict dugrccs or hvoui-;rbility for
depo\i(s arid degrees of favou~abilily for barrens wllich
I f o ccll has truth-mcmhcrship value 'I?>
( 9 ) grcalcr than
are truth-tiie~nhershipT., (.c) and falw-tne~rthershipF d , (;c),
3 ~I~i-csl~wld
~ a l u cI ~ C I I his cvll is ~Iassificdas dcpusir, reqpectively. Thew two value3 a1.r then u5ed tn calculate the
ottler~lisethe cell ix cli~ssifiet-las hiil.en. On (he olher indetrrmi nacy-mt.mbr3rchi1,ibrclip vnluec I,,, (.I:). The three outputs
hand. if a cell has r;~l\e-rnen~bership
value F D ( y ) Irsx obtained from thcsc t111.c~
iictivork aruliitccturcs arc comhincd
than a threshold value then thir; cell i q classified ax
using llic proposed cnsc~nblctccliniqucs. All rcsults shown
depocit, otherwise the cell is clahsified as harretl. The
in this paper arc caluulatcd I'rom llic tcsr data set.
results obtained frorn the best threshold tor both truthTable I 2nd Tahle 11 show the percentage of total cnrtect
membership and false-me~nhershl valuec are the11 cell5 obtained from individual tieurn1 network nrchitectures
combined usliig tlic logical opcratol. irnrl to providc using a range o t threshold valuec to the truth-membershi p and
lhc prediction rcsults. Thu dcgrcc of uncertainty is cx- to thu falsc-mcmbcrship vrtlucs. rcspcutivcly. Thc hcst thrcsliprcsscd by the i i i d c t ~ m i n a c y - n ~ a n b a . s h ivalue
p
ID(y) ulds to rhc truth-mcmhcrship for l3PNN. G K N S . and PKN
which is caluulatcd as the dii'i'crcnt bct~vccn truth- mc 0.5. 0.b. i~nd0.5. rcspcctivcly. 'l'hc bcst thresholds to thc
incn~bcrshipilnd L~lsc-mcmbcrshipl,alues.
rillst-m~i11b~i.ship
Tor BPNN. CRNN. i~ndPNN a1.c 0.4. 0.4,
6) nynarr~icaveraging using T > F
and 0.5. rer;pectively. Table 111 shoivs the pel-centage of total
In this technique, an interval neutrosnphic xet I3 is
col-reci cells obtained ~ I ~ I the
I I compari\on bet \v eel1 iruihcreated using the same previous technique. In order membrr~hipand falce-ttie~nbrrshipvalues T,,, ( z )> F,,; ( , r ) ,
to predict the favourability for depocits. if the ttuth- and obtained using the logical operator rrrrd to the prediction
membership value is greater than the false-membership
rcsults using tlic hcst thrcahold for truth-mcmbcrship and
ualuc I >)(?I)> &A(!!) thcn the cell is classified aa tlic hcst threshold for talrc-~ticiilcrshi valucs. Table IV
duposit. Othc~.wiscthc ccll is ulassificd as barren. Thc shows tllc pcrucnragc of loral uurrcct cells ublaincd fro111
dcg~.ucol' unccrtaiiiry fur each ccll is rcprcscntcd by ctlunl wcight avcriiging and d!niimic wvighr iivvritging using
thc indc~crminacq.-ii~c~l~bc~-ship
valuc In (y).
a range of thrcshold valucs lo ttlc 11xth-nicnlbcrship \:~IIUCS
(T :-. threshold val i~es)and to the false-~nernbershipvalues
( F < threshold values).
A. GIS rlrrru sat
'lablc V shuws thv classification accuracy for the test dnta
The data set used in tliis study was obtained froin a11 set usirig our. proposed cnse~tibletechniques including the
approxiinately 100 x 100 k111 arca of the Arcllaen~iYilgarn accu racy obtained f1.oi11 the existirig techniques that apply
Block, ncnr Kalgoorlie. Wcstcni Australia. This data set W C ~ C only truth-member-sl~ipvalues and the accuracy obtained by
preprocessecl and compiled into GIS layers fr.oi11 a variety of applying only false-~nernbershipvalues. The comparison of
soutrcs such as geology. geochernistsy, and geophysics. Lt'r: accuracy among these techniques shows that the accuracy
u~here

3037

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

ohlailled Tl.nrn nur p~,nposedtech~liques i~sirig holh tl.iltllrnemhet.ship and false-mernhersliip values is sinlilnr to the
oucuriicy ublaincd froin thc cxisting tcuhniqucs using unly
truth-mcmburship valucs and alsu similar lo ~ h ci i c c u l ~ i l ~ ~

obtained fr.0111 the tecli~iiques~isirigo ~ l l yfalse-111e111bership

values. In dynamic weight averaging technique, the iinccrtnility or indetzrminacy-11ie1111)erqhipvaluer are integrated
illto Ilic rrurh-mcmbcrsliip and L'i~lsc-mcmbcrship valucs lu
suppol~the confidence of the prediction. This proposed
technique p~.nvidesa xlightly better accuracy than the nther
cnscmblc tcchniqucs shown in this pnper. l:u~thcrmorc. iill
our proposecl techniques call represent ~incertairlty in the

prediction for each cell location.

Tablt: VI shows sample outpi~tsfro111 e n ~ e m b l eof ncu-

Tlu.c.;tlold
valhc
0. I
0.2

KPNS
GKNS
IPNS
(k CO~TCI Tk C O ~ T C I (k C O ~ Y C I
50.79
58.02.
5h.79
59.26
62.46
59.26

0.3
V,4

71.60

72.84

75,31

0.5

72.84

0.b
U,7

70..37

81,48
$0.25
76.54
4 . 4
W.2V
43.2 1

4,8

64.20
.%.O'L

U,9

39,38

65.43
67.41)
69. I4
b4.10
6?3b

59.26

50.62

lal 11etnn1-ksusing dyrialnic weight, ave~.ngirigby considering the cornparison between tr.utli-membership and falsen~cinbashipvalucs (Y'U(g) > k h ( g ) ) . Vuantification of
uncei-hin ~ ycan suppor! thu dcci si un making. For ex;jmplc,
the third row ~f tliih table contain the uncertainty value
0.2949 in which the decision ~nakercall accept this result
for 3 cell is
with innre corifidence. Sometirrles, ~~ncei-tairlty
high. ]:or cxomplc. rhc rourth row and rhc scvcnth row of this

table contain ucry high uncertainty values which arc 0.8475

and 0.97 1 6, respectively. The t r n t l ~ - ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~p i and
l e s sfalsel~i
n~cmbzrshipTor each uT these cells are very clo\e ingether.
tlelwork. The erperimelltal rewltr show [hat our .proposed
Tlte cell at the fnurlh rnw is predicted tn 1,e 3 depnsit which
erlcerrthle techniques pm\;ide silnilnr accuracy to other exist1s correct. The cell at the seventh row is also predicted to be
in:, et~sernbletechniques applied in this paper: Results from
;I dcposit but il is inuorrccr. In lliis casc, the dccision ~ n ~ i k c r
thc cspcrimcnts havc not idcntificd any approach which is
can rcmakc dccision fur thc cells thal contain high dcgrcc of
oblc tu providc a signiliciint iinprovcmcnt vvcr the othcrs.
uncei~ainly.
Ilowcvcr. thc clynaiuic iivcrapiilg appruilch h;js 2 sligh~lq.
better- perforlnance. T h e key c ~ n t r i b u t i v ~i ni this study is
that nll the proposed tecliriiques arc capable of representing
uncertainty in the prediction of favourability for encli cell
locaticln. While this pnpw focuses only on the uncertainty i n
the prediction outpi~t.research is cuntinued on the assehslnznt
of uncertainty in the CIS itlpi~tdata pr-iot-to npplyitig ro the
prcdicriui~s)stcm.
-

In th i h paper, interval rle~ltrnsophic bet+ are integrated

i n k cnscmblu oT ncul.nl nctworks to plrdicr dcprccs of
favnulakility for depn+it>and hanenh. They are also used to
quantify uncc~tointyin the prediction. Three pairs ul" ncuriil

networks arc trained iisirig t h r w differ.ent neural nctwcrrk

archi tttctureh it) nrder to provide thlw interval neutrnmphic
scr s which arc then combincd using our propuscd aggregation
techniques. T h e three neural network aschitectures used in
this paper are feed-forward hackl,~.npagatior~1le~1ra1
rietwo~.!i,
genuriil rcgrcssion ncural nctwork. and pulynomiiil ncuriil

3038

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

TABLE V
C [ . ~ S S I IIC.31 ION . l C C L l < ! ~ C " lI t1K ~ [ ~ l l t . ' [ ' l ' S ' l ' [ > \ ~ [ ~ * r S l " l ' l l SIIIE.
lS~i

[O] I. K. I~~IIWII
ii[ltI l', S a l i ~ ~ l i o [l~a1Ic111
l.
!liiilI>\i> ilii~lb l ~ l c l i i ~ l111Ielc
I~;CIIK. /EKE T r - ( ~ i f . i ( ~ [ t[ it iot ~P~C/IVI-II
~.+
A I I ( I / ~ LIIIO
, > ~ h\ l ~ ~ < , / ~111irl!iirzc
t'KOl'r~St'l?'['I:C'tlN[()CI:S ASl)-[Ill. l ' X I S ' ~ l Y <'['l:C'tlK[()Cl:S
i
$ ~ , r ? r . ~ .vc>].12. PI). 99-7-1 ( D l . I 490.
[ l O] 7 -Q. Stlcii aiid r.-S.Kon;. Dyn;l~iiic;~lly wh.ci;lirtJ c r ~ \ c r ~ i hr~cural
l~I
L
I
H a i ~ c l ccll
l
Tr)ral cell
i i c ~ w o r k sl ' t ~r c f r ~ h ~ i PIU~~CIII\.
o~i
PIT?^.. I ~ TC / I ~/ J I! I ~P I ~ I L ~ I ~ ( C'OIII~~(~/
f<,i-(,~~<
or!
, ( , ~l-lrct,llir~c,
Lctrl-ifir~g
<rrzrl C?hr~-~roii,.i.
Sli:i~i:t~ai. 2004. 3492E i ~ a c r ~ i hTl ~c .c t ~ r ~ i q ~ ~ c
1 5CCHIVCI)
I'd co~i*.cl) t9cui-rccrl
Myni~r)~ n ~ i n[; T i
H2,Sh
78.2(1
80.25
349 h.
[ I I ] C'. C'. Flwng. V, 151": W. l<r~>u,n.; ~ t i ( l K. tV. ';!(>iig.
Cotnp;~r,ing ihc
\I a,i<ii-i~y~i31iiis
i bb
7 1 4.3
80 VO
X0.1'.
IWI ti>1-1~13iic'~'
~t~dll'l;.~-cnt n c u ~ n nctn.i>l-h~
l
arcli~tcc~llrc\
ii11- tlic ],~cd~ct~i>n
klajrii-ity ~ c l ~ i iii I'&;P)
y
h 8 57
8h
79.0 1
niL~ i i ~ n c r a
] +l ~ n ~ p c c t i ~/'171i-.
i ~ y . flit, I + I L ~ ~ I // II ~ ~ ~ , ~ I I ( I ~ ~ I (> 'I ~I (II I/ ? / ~ * Itm
,(,II~
Lluic>i-iry ~ o l i i ~( I'h
g P)
83 71
7h 09
fin.??
: W L ~ ~ , /f.r>~~rr~iff,q
I I I I ( , L I ~ (I'3 ~/ W I , I I P I ~ C - . (I(':\ii.('
\
2oM1. ( ~ i u a ~ y / h o u(-lii
. II~.
,Avt.r,;i:i~~g ( T i
Y2.86
78.36
80.25
2 W 5 . -393-39X.
,Avcr.:~gi~~g
(P)
YO.00
80.43
8U.25
1 111 A. CJ. I>ilLhiiciiLt~.I ' o l y n ( ~ [ ~ iThct~i->
i~l
t i [ Cr)iuplc.x Syxlcii~s,l t t t 2
Avcraginp rT&I:)
80.00
80.43
80.25
I ~ Y I I I , \ L I C , ! on
~ ~ I SI .x~ r f r * ~ ~Mcrr~
~ . r . r111r1I-'rht.~-rzr,!~r,r.
~(11.1, pp. 1h.3-378.
4 ~ c r a ~ i i!.I'/F)
ig
KI.iih
78,lh
80.23
1971.
D y i i a n ~ i c:~vcr;lging (T)
110 00
1;l01
X 1.11;
[ 131 F,S i ~ ~ a i ~ i > [ i ~/II i ~L!rzi{li~~,y
~ t ~ c . i,-i<,/riill L < y i <. i , ~ Y < , ~ I ~ I ~ ? ,Loyii,.
TOJJII~LI ) y i ~ a i ~ uIIL.CI.~~:~[~::
c
ir )
80.00
78.26
79.0 1
t
:
~5 , C I I ~i I O Pmhtrhilif~
I ~
orrtl S/trfi.>~ic.~.
nyii:jiiiic nvc~,ngirl; ( T k F )
YO.00
82.61
8 1.4s
1111t,dcdil~otl.Xiclun~i.Phoct~ir.2003.
1lyii;jnilc ovcrngltly (T,Irl
Y2.86
78.36
80.25
[ 1-11 1 I, Wat~;. 1. Sninrai>dnct~c.Y.-V. %hat>;. nnd K ,Sundcrr;~n~on.
rrrfcr-rcri
: i 1 r ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~SL,~),
. i ~ <~I jI jI l~ hl<i~-:
f ~ t . T J ~ C O <I I; I~I ~~ \ l ) I ~ / l c ~ ( iif1
i i ~C(IIII/>II
?~i~ Ii111:: i l ~ f t / ! ~ ~ . i&ooA
o / ~ / fSct,ics
~ t , :Vo.J. ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ / / ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~
TABLF. VI
:lccc~.;cd Junc 2M5.
s,it%il'[,l:OLl'~t,L l'5 f:KO\I t , . l Y l \ i H [ , t : (!I Nt:L I<,\l, \l.:l!AOKKX
LlYIN(i
[ I S ] I, V. TCI~W, T, 1, iik\ciitn;l. i'V,
,Vvlkovictl. i ~ r l i lI>, Y2 F i l i p w ,
r)unltjrrt: ~ Y I ~ I ~ , I IAVI
I
K A ( , I X ( ~ ( ' I ' 2 1, ) I.(II< 1 1 1 1 r1.s I I).II.\ st:-l
\'i~-tuifI C O I I I ~ Y I ~ I ( IL-h<,ri~i,>tr:r
~ ~ ( > I I L ILi!h~~-lr!o~>-.
/
l011-Ii11h.cl !lv;lll~lbl~~:
th11p;/il4h. 107.2 17.17t;/l;~t~1]~1111fu1~1~~.t1~i11l.
i ~ c ~ c > a rY, rd? \ c ~ l l t x2005.
r
FillhcI~i~I~~~i-~~iir~iicy
,4cruul
1'1-c<licrr.d
Trut11\fc[>~l>c[,\l~ip \fc[>~lhc[,\l~ip \fcr~~t>c[,>I~ip
Ccll Typt Ccll Typt
r ) t ] > < + \ i ~ I:)t]>~i\i~
O.tlk26
+539
701
r')t11n\i1
H;uirii
0.41 48
U.676?
0.7136
t 1 i
I 1 i
0.8342
0.1198
0,2449
r')t110\i1
l ; ) t ] ~ ~ i \ i ~ 0.Sh75
U.5149
0.9475
H;uicij
H~uicii
0.1h29
U.8hY6
11.2943
HAIICI~
I:)?]\o\il
0.6105
U.4336
0.8432
H;uicij
I:)t]w+i~
0,5 I 8 I
0.4X9t;
0.g716
HAIICI~
HL~II~II
0.3079
U,bS.%
U,b5J1
(,

Pawalai Krnipeet.npun is supported by postgraduate rcsearch scholarship fsoln the Royal Thai Govcrnlncnt.

300f
151 A. -5Li1t>iii-. \4i1icrd l>t)tci~~iilI
r~iilp~>ir~;
~lyiri: l ' ~ ~ d - I ' o l - ~[lcural
a~d

L
I-I

w<~rk\.P I ~ J L~ , .1 !rz#i,~
7 ~ I I ~ I I I O I I ( I / JNII! C ~ ~ ~ r ~ i( ?~I ) r: ~(' <~J ~ rI td!
Iz <
:~'<CIII
~ ~ i11-A,+.
~
3003. 1813 1819.
[ h ] \i. 1)c.l. C , C. Fung. W. V.i(lr,wn, illid T. C c d c r ~ ~A
i . gtiic[,:~l~,c;rc\\ioii
[ I C L I ~[ ~l c ~ ~ ( ph[ ka d [~it)dcII'UT [iiiiicrd l ' i ~ v t u ~ h i l prh.ct!i~li<>~n.
i~y
PIYIL,.
rlrc Fijtt~ ~ ? s I ~ I - M ~ I [ ( IL!<~c/~-ic~ir
/ L ,
E t ~ g i ~ i t ~ t ~( rI iI tI ~~CpO I I I ~ WS IJ ~
, I IJ II ~ J I A I I I ) ) I tI'l:l<t-.7 ?OO/).
I%i-~li.W-rstvrii ,411~1~1li:~.
3004. 207 209>
[ 7 ] V. I y.C. C, rung. W. Hi<,wn, iliiil T.C c d c r ~ ~Lhr+*d
i.
~ ) ( ~ l y i iill~ ~11c11ril1
ii~i
r~clv,r?rkI u r ~ ~ t ~ i i i ~~>rri' lolu ] ~ c c l .l ~\ ~i ~ ~y l l >In\ iaGIS
\
cr~riioii1ilcii1.P111i:
rlrc lEEf1 Ht'pir)~~
10 C-vrdi,rt,rzc,c,i7r.ffro11
2004). Cliiilrl; Mai. Tliai lalirl.
3004. 4 1 1-414.
[U] C. C. Fung. V. Iy. W. Riown. illid K. W. \i'oiip. S ~ u r i Sc1w11rk
l
E I I ~ ~ I I I ~ I I~~ISL.CI
L~
.A]I~I[~~ICII lur L l i ~ ~ c rl 'i rl o \ l w ~ l ~I +I I~' i - c ~ I i c l l ~P~f ~ )~i., .
1j3c I E H ,4t,Fir>1110 c ~ ~ r ~ i ~ (rT~P~I Ir ~z J200.7).
< J~I (I ~ \ ~ c l l ~ r ~ ~ ,~4 r1~1 isc~i.:j.~ i l
2005 (TI>-KOY. 5 pil;o\l.

3039

Authorized licensed use limited to: Murdoch University. Downloaded on June 15, 2009 at 03:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

~~/~I