Figures & data
Table 1. Data description of 1582 basalt samples used in this study.
Table 2. Discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on four data mining algorithms.
Figure 4. Confusion matrixes of geochemical discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on four data mining algorithms: (a) LRC, (b) Naïve Bayes, (c) Random Forest and (d) MLP.
![Figure 4. Confusion matrixes of geochemical discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on four data mining algorithms: (a) LRC, (b) Naïve Bayes, (c) Random Forest and (d) MLP.](/cms/asset/9df2d309-fe7e-4ef4-8805-68adc2e0cd9d/tbed_a_1572452_f0004_c.jpg)
Figure 5. Impacts of different data preprocessing techniques on the discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on four data mining algorithms: (a) LRC, (b) Naïve Bayes, (c) Random Forest, and (d) MLP.
![Figure 5. Impacts of different data preprocessing techniques on the discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on four data mining algorithms: (a) LRC, (b) Naïve Bayes, (c) Random Forest, and (d) MLP.](/cms/asset/c695ba4c-5682-4340-b2f0-025925bdf1a6/tbed_a_1572452_f0005_c.jpg)
Table 3. Combination results of basic elements on the basis of feature importance measurement.
Table 4. Number of missing values for 12 basic elements in different tectonic settings.
Figure 7. Impacts of different combinations of basic elements (note that feature importance goes from large to small) on the discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on Random Forest.
![Figure 7. Impacts of different combinations of basic elements (note that feature importance goes from large to small) on the discrimination results of tectonic settings of olivine based on Random Forest.](/cms/asset/bb1ddcb0-e68d-4623-944e-0d10fbc135c1/tbed_a_1572452_f0007_c.jpg)
Table 5. Single and overall classification accuracy for different sample data volumes.