Tion. (c,d) show peaks of of phyllic rgillic alteration minerals.The XRD in (e) shows argillic

Tion. (c,d) show peaks of of phyllic rgillic alteration minerals.The XRD in (e) shows argillic The XRD of (a,b) show peaks of of phyllic alteration. (c,d) show peaks phyllic rgillic alteration minerals. (d) S19, (e)in (e) shows and (g) S16 Figure 13. The XRD evaluation of (a) the S04, (b) S07, (c) S13, S21, (f) S14, alteration. The peaks in (f,g) samples. that samples S14 and S16 were show peaks of phyllic alteration. (c) The C/S signifies indicate The XRD benefits of (a)S16 werecollected from propylitic alteration. and (d) show peaks of argillic alteration. The peaks in (f,g) indicate that samples S14 and and (b) collected from propylitic alteration. The C/S indicates Count per second is y title and two will be the x title. two phyllic rgillic alteration minerals. The XRD in (e) shows argillic alteration. The peaks in (f) and (g)six. Xamoterol Description Accuracy Assessment 5.2. Geochemical Analysis and 2 may be the x title. per second is y title To evaluate the performances in the on all 21 SAM procedures, classification ICP-MS and XRF analyses were performed SVM and samples taken in the studyresults wereGeochemicalwithof the S04 sample showed enrichment ofDP benefits that incorporated the five.2. compared Analysis DP final results. Within this comparison, the Au (104 ppb), As (289 regions. The ICP-MS analysis the ppm), alteration of phyllite, argillic, propylitic, and iron oxides were utilised as ground truth. User Cu (467 ppm),and XRF (21 ppm) have been performed on all 21 samples In the ICP-MS study ICP-MS and Mo analyses components (Penicillide MedChemExpress Appendix A, Table A1). taken from the resultsaccuracy, producer accuracy, of your S04 sampleand kappa 3014 ppm)of Auobservable As (289 of S06 The ICP-MS evaluation overall accuracy, (1195 and coefficient [70,71] had been calculated places. and S07 samples, the Zn enrichment showed enrichment was (104 ppb), to evaluate accuracy in the sample, Mn (3464 ppm), a total accuracy of Au and 67.two (Appendix A, Cu the A1). In the S09 results. The results showedCu (198 Table A1). 84.4the ICP-MS ppm), Table ppm), and Mo (21 ppm) components (Appendix, ppm) and In (60 (467 for SVM and SAM, respectively. The value of the kappa coefficient for SVM was 0.74 and ppb) showed enrichment (Appendix A, the ZnA1). The ICP-MS outcomes in the S11was observable final results of S06 and S07 samples, Table enrichment (1195 and 3014 ppm) sample for SAM it was 0.52. As could be observed from Tables 1 and 2, the classification of the phyllic, evaluation showed Mn (1664 ppm) the S09 sample, Mn (3464 ppm), Cu (198 ppm) and Au (60 ppb) (Appendix, Table A1). In enrichment (Appendix A, Table A1). Pb (280 ppm) and argillic, and propylitic alteration outcomes in the SVM system had been a lot more precise, however the Cu (509showed enrichment (Appendix, Table A1). wereICP-MS outcomes on the S11of Figure ppm) enrichment in the form of malachite The observed in the location sample evaluation Fe-oxides alteration outcome from the SAM classification was far more consistent with ground truth. 11e, from which Mn S21 sample was collected (Appendix Table A1). PbThe XRF analysisCu (509 showed the (1664 ppm) enrichment (Appendix, A, Table A1). (280 ppm) and also the finest result was within the classification of propylitic alteration within the SVM system. was performed for all samples; the outcomes are shown in Appendixat the location of Figure 11e, ppm) enrichment within the form of malachite have been observed A, Table A2. Altered samples showed higher amounts of Al2was collected (Appendix,SiO2 (41.42 up to 56.24 ), from which the S21 sample O3 (17.00 up to 24.20 ), Table A1). The XRF evaluation was.