RE: [ai-geostats] natural neighbor applied to indicator transforms

I try to reformulate my question. When performing direct (i.e. without crossvariogram) indicator kriging, practically we interpolate probability values by means of ordinary kriging. These probability values could represent the probability of occurrence of some category or the probability to

[ai-geostats] gslib superblock search

Dear, I’m a PhD student dealing with geostatistical facies mapping, I’m using KT3D from GSLIB (Deutsch and Journel, 1992) to make some facies maps. I’m working with rather large grids, and I’ve realized that the following parameters located in the kt3d.inc file: MAXSBX (maximum super block nodes

Re: [ai-geostats] Pareto vs Lognormal distribution

Hi Chris Thank you for your reply. And thank you for your paper reference - I'll take a look at your probability plots. Yes the apparent lognormality of oil and gas fields which moves more to a Pareto form with progressive and mature exploration is explained by undersampling at the low end

Re: [ai-geostats] Pareto vs Lognormal distribution

HI Ted Thanks for your reply. Yes you are correct. The probability that a field will be discovered is the product of f(x) that it is from a natural abundance (of its parent population) and as a function of its size g(x). And yes the larger the field is the greater the probability that it is