The integration of Big Earth Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized geological and mineral mapping by delivering enhanced accuracy, efficiency, and scalability in analyzing large-scale remote sensing datasets. This study appraisals the application of advanced AI techniques, including machine learning and deep learning models such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), to multispectral and hyperspectral data for the identification and classification of geological formations and mineral deposits. The manuscript provides a critical analysis of AI’s capabilities, emphasizing its current significance and potential as demonstrated by organizations like NASA in managing complex geospatial datasets. A detailed examination of selected AI methodologies, criteria for case selection, and ethical and social impacts enriches the discussion, addressing gaps in the responsible application of AI in geosciences. The findings highlight notable improvements in detecting complex spatial patterns and subtle spectral signatures, advancing the generation of precise geological maps. Quantitative analyses compare AI-driven approaches with traditional techniques, underscoring their superiority in performance metrics such as accuracy and computational efficiency. The study also proposes solutions to challenges such as data quality, model transparency, and computational demands. By integrating enhanced visual aids and practical case studies, the research underscores its innovations in algorithmic breakthroughs and geospatial data integration. These contributions advance the growing body of knowledge in Big Earth Data and geosciences, setting a foundation for responsible, equitable, and impactful future applications of AI in geological and mineral mapping.

1. Paravano A, Patrizi M, Razzano E, et al. The impact of the new space economy on sustainability: an overview. Acta Astronautica. 2024; 222: 162-173. doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2024.05.046

2. Earth observation. Available online: joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu (accessed on 23 November 2022).

3. Newcomers Earth Observation Guide | ESA Business Applications. Available online: business.esa.int (accessed on 23 November 2022).

4. GEO at a Glance. Available online: https://earthobservations.org/ (accessed on 25 August 2020).

5. Pennisi E. Meet the Landsat pioneer who fought to revolutionize Earth observation. Science. 2021; 373 (6561): 1292. doi:10.1126/science.acx9080

6. Eklundh L. Remote sensing and Earth observation. Available online: www.nateko.lu.se (accessed on 27 September 2022).

7. Ashley S. Game changer satellite will measure most of the water on the planet. CNN; 2022.

8. Tomás R, Li Z. Earth Observations for Geohazards: Present and Future Challenges. Remote Sensing. 2017; 9(3): 194. doi:10.3390/rs9030194

9. Balenovic I, Marjanovic H, Vuletic D, et al. Quality assessment of high density digital surface model over different land cover classes. Periodicum Biologorum. 2015; 117(4): 459–470. doi: 10.18054/pb.2015.117.4.3452

10. Appendix A—Glossary and Acronyms. Severn Tidal Tributaries Catchment Flood Management Plan—Scoping Stage. UK: Environment Agency; 2009. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c871ae5274a7b7e321087/Severn_Tidal_Tributaries_Catchment_Management_Plan.pdf

11. Ronald T. Terrain models—A tool for natural hazard Mapping. In: Avalanche Formation, Movement and Effects. IAHS Publ; 1987.

12. Making 3D Terrain Maps, Shaded Relief. Available online: https://www.shadedrelief.com/ (accessed on 11 March 2019).

13. Robert S. Elegant Figures What Not To Do: Vertical Exaggeration. NASA Earth Observatory; 2010.

14. Hargitai H, Willner K, Buchroithner M. Methods in Planetary Topographic Mapping: A Review. In: Planetary Cartography and GIS. Springer International Publishing; 2019. pp. 147–174.

15. Banerdt B. Orbital Laser Altimeter. In: The Martian Chronicle. NASA. 2024; 1(3). https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/experiment/display.action?id=1996-062A-03

16. NASA, LOLA. Available online: https://science.nasa.gov/mission/lro/lola/ (accessed on 4 May 2020).

17. Cavanaugh JF, Smith JC, Sun X, et al. The Mercury Laser Altimeter Instrument for the MESSENGER Mission. In: Space Science Review. Springer Nature; 2007.

18. Hargitai H, Willner K, Hare T. Fundamental Frameworks in Planetary Mapping: A Review. In: Planetary Cartography and GIS. Springer International Publishing; 2019. pp. 75–101.

19. ALOS World 3D-30m. Available online: www.eorc.jaxa.jp (accessed on 4 May 2020).

20. ALOS World 3D. Available online: www.aw3d.jp (accessed on 4 May 2020).

21. Emisoft. 8 Things To Look For When Selecting Environmental Data Software. Available online: www.emisoft.com (accessed on 21 April 2020).

22. ESG assets may hit $53 trillion by 2025, a third of global AUM. Available online: https://www.bloomberg.com/professional/insights/trading/esg-assets-may-hit-53-trillion-by-2025-a-third-of-global-aum/ (accessed on 21 April 2020).

23. Kuznetsov VD, Sinelnikov VM, Alpert SN. Yakov Alpert: Sputnik-1 and the first satellite ionospheric experiment. Advances in Space Research. 2015; 55(12): 2833–2839. doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2015.02.033

24. How many Earth observation satellites are orbiting the planet in 2021? Available online: https://geospatialworld.net/blogs/how-many-satellites-are-orbiting-the-earth-in-2021/ (accessed on 18 August 2021).

25. Introduction to satellite. Available online: www.sasmac.cn (16 September 2016).

26. NASA. Drought in Iraq: Image of the Day. Available online: https://archive.org/details/ge_08797 (accessed on 18 August 2021).

27. Earth Observing System Data and Information System. Available online: https://www.nasa.gov/stem-content/earth-observing-system-data-and-information-system/ (accessed on 5 June 2024).

28. Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) Project. Available online: https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/about/esdis (accessed on 3 May 2019).

29. Behnke J, Kittel D. Looking Back at 25 Years With NASA’s EOSDIS Distributed Active Archive Centers. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts (Report). 2017; 2017: IN43A–0060.

30. Topics | Earthdata. Available online: https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/ (accessed on 24 August 2021).

31. Wanchoo L, James N, Ramapriyan HK. NASA EOSDIS Data Identifiers: Approach and System. Data Science Journal. 2017; 16.

32. Blumenfeld J. The Global Change Master Directory: Data, Services, and Tools Serving the International Science Community. Earthdata (Report); 2017

33. ECHO—Application Program Interfaces (APIs) for Search and Order Global Change Master Directory. Available online: https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/news/feature-articles/common-metadata-repository-foundation-nasas-earth-observation-data (accessed on 24 August 2021).

34. Bach D. With Azure, the US Army Corps of Engineers gains a ‘powerful tool’ for storm modeling. Available online: https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/digital-transformation/with-azure-the-us-army-corps-of-engineers-gains-a-powerful-tool-for-storm-modeling/ (accessed on 5 May 2024).

35. Retooling AI for Earth grants with Microsoft Dynamics 365. Available online: https://www.microsoft.com/insidetrack/blog/retooling-ai-for-earth-grants-with-microsoft-dynamics-365/ (accessed on 5 May 2024).

36. Lunden I. Microsoft launches AI for Earth to give $2M in services to environmental projects. TechCrunch; 2017.

37. Microsoft Planetary Computer. Available online: https://planetarycomputer.microsoft.com/ (accessed on 11 June 2023).

38. Microsoft wants to be a major AI player. In: Here’s its master plan. Wired UK. https://www.wired.com/story/inside-microsofts-ai-comeback/

39. Smith B. AI for Earth can be a game-changer for our planet. Available online: https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2017/12/11/ai-for-earth-can-be-a-game-changer-for-our-planet/ (accessed on 11 June 2023).

40. AI for Earth - Microsoft AI. Available online: www.microsoft.com (accessed on 11 June 2023).

41. Mueller JP, Massaron L. Machine learning for dummies. John Wiley & Sons; 2021.

42. Sang X, Xue L, Ran X, et al. Intelligent High-Resolution Geological Mapping Based on SLIC-CNN. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2020; 9(2): 99. doi: 10.3390/ijgi9020099

43. Si L, Xiong X, Wang Z, et al. A Deep Convolutional Neural Network Model for Intelligent Discrimination between Coal and Rocks in Coal Mining Face. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2020; 2020: 1–12. doi: 10.1155/2020/2616510

44. Merembayev T, Yunussov R, Yedilkhan A. Machine Learning Algorithms for Classification Geology Data from Well Logging. 2018 14th International Conference on Electronics Computer and Computation (ICECCO). Published online November 2018: 206–212. doi: 10.1109/icecco.2018.8634775

45. Costa I, Tavares F, Oliveira J. Predictive lithological mapping through machine learning methods: a case study in the Cinzento Lineament, Carajás Province, Brazil. Journal of the Geological Survey of Brazil. 2019; 2(1): 26–36. doi: 10.29396/jgsb.2019.v2.n1.3

46. Kumar C, Chatterjee S, Oommen T, et al. Automated lithological mapping by integrating spectral enhancement techniques and machine learning algorithms using AVIRIS-NG hyperspectral data in Gold-bearing granite-greenstone rocks in Hutti, India. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation. 2020; 86: 102006. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2019.102006

47. Radford DDG, Cracknell MJ, Roach MJ, et al. Geological Mapping in Western Tasmania Using Radar and Random Forests. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing. 2018; 11(9): 3075–3087. doi: 10.1109/jstars.2018.2855207

48. Wang Y, Ksienzyk AK, Liu M, et al. Multigeophysical data integration using cluster analysis: assisting geological mapping in Trøndelag, Mid-Norway. Geophysical Journal International. 2020; 225(2): 1142–1157. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaa571

49. Latifovic R, Pouliot D, Campbell J. Assessment of Convolution Neural Networks for Surficial Geology Mapping in the South Rae Geological Region, Northwest Territories, Canada. Remote Sensing. 2018; 10 (2): 307. doi:10.3390/rs10020307

50. Marjanović M, Kovačević M, Bajat B, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment using SVM machine learning algorithm. Engineering Geology. 2011; 123(3): 225–234. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.09.006

51. Kawabata D, Bandibas J. Landslide susceptibility mapping using geological data, a DEM from ASTER images and an Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Geomorphology. 2009; 113(1–2): 97–109. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.006

52. Chauhan S, Sharma M, Arora MK, et al. Landslide Susceptibility Zonation through ratings derived from Artificial Neural Network. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation. 2010; 12(5): 340–350. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2010.04.006

53. Biswajeet P, Saro L. Utilization of Optical Remote Sensing Data and GIS Tools for Regional Landslide Hazard Analysis Using an Artificial Neural Network Model. Earth Science Frontiers. 2017; 14 (6): 143–151. doi:10.1016/s1872-5791(08)60008-1

54. International society for rock mechanics commission on standardization of laboratory and field tests. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts. 1978; 15(6): 319–368. doi:10.1016/0148-9062(78)91472-9. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0148906278914729

55. Bellante GJ, Powell SL, Lawrence RL, et al. Aerial detection of a simulated CO2 leak from a geologic sequestration site using hyperspectral imagery. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 2013; 13: 124–137. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.11.034

56. Chen J, Zhou M, Zhang D, et al. Quantification of water inflow in rock tunnel faces via convolutional neural network approach. Automation in Construction. 2021; 123: 103526. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103526

57. Bhattacharya B, Solomatine DP. Machine learning in soil classification. Neural Networks. 2006; 19(2): 186–195. doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2006.01.005

58. Zhang Y, Wang G, Li M, et al. Automated Classification Analysis of Geological Structures Based on Images Data and Deep Learning Model. Applied Sciences. 2018; 8(12): 2493. doi: 10.3390/app8122493

59. Li Z, Meier M, Hauksson E, et al. Machine Learning Seismic Wave Discrimination: Application to Earthquake Early Warning. Geophysical Research Letters. 2018; 45(10): 4773–4779. doi: 10.1029/2018gl077870

60. Rouet‐Leduc B, Hulbert C, Lubbers N, et al. Machine Learning Predicts Laboratory Earthquakes. Geophysical Research Letters. 2017; 44(18): 9276–9282. doi: 10.1002/2017gl074677

61. Petty TR, Dhingra P. Streamflow Hydrology Estimate Using Machine Learning (SHEM). JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 2017; 54(1): 55–68. doi: 10.1111/1752-1688.12555

62. Merghadi A, Yunus AP, Dou J, et al. Machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility studies: A comparative overview of algorithm performance. Earth-Science Reviews. 2020; 207: 103225. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103225

63. Akhtar ZB, Tajbiul Rawol A. Unlocking the Future for the New Data Paradigm of DNA Data Storage : An Investigative Analysis of Advancements, Challenges, Future Directions. Journal of Information Sciences. doi: 10.34874/IMIST.PRSM/JIS-V23I1.47102

64. Bin Akhtar Z. Artificial intelligence (AI) within manufacturing: An investigative exploration for opportunities, challenges, future directions. Metaverse. 2024; 5(2): 2731. doi: 10.54517/m.v5i2.2731

65. Bin Akhtar Z. From bard to Gemini: An investigative exploration journey through Google’s evolution in conversational AI and generative AI. Computing and Artificial Intelligence. 2024; 2(1): 1378. doi: 10.59400/cai.v2i1.1378

66. Akhtar ZB. Unveiling the evolution of generative AI (GAI): a comprehensive and investigative analysis toward LLM models (2021–2024) and beyond. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology. 2024; 11(1). doi: 10.1186/s43067-024-00145-1

67. Unraveling the Promise of Computing DNA Data Storage: An Investigative Analysis of Advancements, Challenges, Future Directions. Journal of Advances in Artificial Intelligence. 2024; 2(1). doi: 10.18178/jaai.2024.2.1.122-137

68. Akhtar ZB. The design approach of an artificial intelligent (AI) medical system based on electronical health records (EHR) and priority segmentations. The Journal of Engineering. 2024; 2024(4). doi: 10.1049/tje2.12381

69. Akhtar ZB. Securing Operating Systems (OS): A Comprehensive Approach to Security with Best Practices and Techniques. International Journal of Advanced Network, Monitoring and Controls. 2024; 9(1): 100–111. doi: 10.2478/ijanmc-2024-0010

70. Akhtar ZB. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI): From large language models (LLMs) to multimodal applications towards fine tuning of models, implications, investigations. Computing and Artificial Intelligence. 2024; 3(1): 1498. doi: 10.59400/cai.v3i1.1498

71. Akhtar ZB, Rawol AT. Harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) for cybersecurity: Challenges, opportunities, risks, future directions. Computing and Artificial Intelligence. 2024; 2(2): 1485. doi: 10.59400/cai.v2i2.1485

72. Akhtar ZB, Tajbiul Rawol A. Enhancing Cybersecurity through AI-Powered Security Mechanisms. IT Journal Research and Development. 2024; 9(1): 50–67. doi: 10.25299/itjrd.2024.16852

73. Zarif BA, Ahmed TR. Artificial Intelligence (AI), Extended Reality (XR): A Biomedical Engineering (BME) Perspective Investigation Analysis. RPC Journal of Bio-Med and Clinical Research. RPC Publishers. 2024; 1(1).

74. Akhtar ZB. Artificial Intelligence (AI) within the Realm of Cyber Security. Insight. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2024; 1(1): 1–11.

75. Akhtar Z. Trends Tech Sci Res Computer Vision and Beyond: A Deep Dive Exploration and Investigation. IEEE Region 10 Trends Tech Sci Res. 2024; 7(3). doi: 10.19080/TTSR.2024.07.555711