Workshop on the Establishment of a Geological Model of ...

use them in a similar set of algorithms; otherwise this would become a static programme and much less useful,
and also less credible, than just generating maps and things like that.
The Chairman said that he presumed that one of the last steps would be submitting the results to the
members of LTC for their input. There were quite a few LTC members present, so a lot of that was being done in
real time. Finally, would be the formalization of the results, their incorporation into the central repository, and
generation of the appropriate publications.
The Chairman said he was very happy with the interchange that had taken place and that he thought it had
all been extremely productive, and had helped him to focus on the things that were really important. He said he
would present the synthesis of all that had been worked toward in outline form. Of course, in the final workshop
recommendations, it would be augmented and made complete by the workshop reports as well. He said he had
not listed everything, but that he believed it was quite clear and represented a fairly complete listing of what the
<strong>Workshop</strong> wanted to deal with.
He first wanted to reiterate the basic programme objectives that had been stated and set forth by him at
the beginning of the <strong>Workshop</strong>, and then to go over briefly the strategy for model development; he clarified that
the term “strategy” had been suggested by Yuri [Kazmin] and that he thought it was a good term. The strategy led
to the production of basically two products for the programme:
(a)
(b)
An analytical model
A narrative
He said that he wanted to discuss the key elements of those briefly.
The Chairman said that another very important aspect of the programme was going to be reporting and
coordination, to make sure that the iterative nature of the programme was maintained and that the proper
coordination was done to ensure that the best product was obtained. He wanted to go over briefly the task
descriptions and how each phase could be carried out and, finally, to go over what he thought the programme
benefits were; both to the Seabed Authority and to the oceanographic and scientific community at large.
He reiterated that the programme objectives were to clarify the processes that formed nodules, provide a
guide that explored all those, and to develop a model which could improve and extend the resource assessment
and provide inputs to the explorers' guide and that could be refined and improved. It would be a workable and
transparent model that could be updated and upgraded as new data became available.
Phase One
The strategy for the development of the model was in two parts.
The Chairman said that it was necessary for the geological model to use available data that could provide
testable links to nodule grade and abundance. Those were the criteria for the data to be used in the analytical
model, and an iterative and statistically‐based approach would be used, testing with the data types when they
satisfied those criteria. All the data that were evaluated would be documented in an explorers' guide, which would
be developed in parallel with the analytical model.
The geological model would produce a set of digital and hard‐copy maps representing the key variables of
abundance and grade for the nodules, and also the error estimates associated with those variables. That was
fundamentally what the product of the modelling is.
The explorers' guide was going to consist of a narrative assembly of the factors that were relevant to
exploration; and it would take advantage of the enormous expertise that was available in the <strong>Workshop</strong> and
353 | P age