Vol.3 No.1 2010

27/110

Research paper : The advanced geological researches and fundamental national land information (M. Saito)−24−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.3 No.1 (2010) but how would available borehole data be used? Would they be used as basic data for creating the geological map, or would they be used to validate the accuracy of the created geological map? Also, local governments and private companies in that area may conduct geological surveys for their own purposes. Does AIST use such data to make its own geological maps?Answer (Makoto Saito)1) The reviewer is under the impression that we make our predictions from the sparse outcrops on the surface, but it is possible to obtain sufficient data even if outcrop areas are small, particularly if we walk along a traverse that allows us to observe the overall picture of the strata and rocks. When creating the GMJ, in some places the geological map can be created from traverses at wide intervals, whereas in other places it cannot be made without a very detailed grid of traverses. We devise ways to undertake our surveys so we can collect sufficient data for mapping while also keeping the cost of the survey in mind.2) As written in the paper, if there is local government borehole data that can be disclosed, of course, we use it in the compilation of the geological map. There are not many outcrops on the plains, but there is a lot of borehole data available from local governments in these areas, and we collect and analyze them carefully to create the GMJ. This is because the underground geology is particularly important on a plain. For the Tomochi sheet, we were allowed to view some commercial borehole data (not usually disclosed) obtained by hot spring explorers.3) We also collect and use other geological maps. These include geological maps made for the public works of local governments and the national government. If these geological maps are based on data interpretation, we consider whether the interpretations are valid from the traverse maps and reports from which the interpretations were made. We also collect sketches from dam sites and tunnel walls. For our mapping of the Tomochi sheet, we looked at the geological maps from hot spring survey reports compiled by local governments, and used them to validate our geological map (in reality, the only useful things were the traverse maps in a few small areas).2 Expansion of coverage and update cycle of the GMJ 1:50,000Question (Akira Ono)I understand that the GMJ 1:50,000 series is based on the latest geological findings. What is the cycle for re-survey and revision of the GMJ 1:50,000 series? Specifically, when was the last map before the current Tomochi sheet created? I imagine a survey requires a lot of labor and time. At this point, does the GMJ 1:50,000 entirely cover Japan? Please tell us about the basic thinking concerning the expansion of the area mapped.Answer (Makoto Saito)1) Re-surveying for the GMJ 1:50,000 series is not planned at present because we have not yet covered all of Japan. However, we finished the first phase of the GMJ 1:200,000 in FY 2009 and some of these sheets will be replaced with new ones that incorporate the latest findings. For revision of the GMJ 1:200,000 series, the GMJ 1:50,000 sheets provide the standard for geological classification. They also provide new geological information in areas that were previously poorly understood during 1:200,000 sheet compilation. Therefore, although, in principle, priority is given to areas not yet mapped at 1:50,000 scale, a few areas essential for revision of the GMJ 1:200,000 series are also given priority.2) The GMJ Tomochi 1:50,000 sheet had not previously been created. Surface geology maps of doubtful accuracy were produced during a Fundamental Land Classification Survey undertaken originally by the Economic Planning Agency, later by the National Land Agency, and now by the prefectures under the current Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism.3) It will be difficult to expand the GMJ 1:50,000 series to cover all of Japan with the current number of researchers at AIST. Future expansion will be primarily into important areas such as (1) densely populated cities and surrounds, (2) areas important in terms of disaster prevention, including those subject to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, (3) areas with high social importance such as geoparks, and (4) areas that are essential for the understanding of Japanese geology (for example, areas required for revision of the GMJ 1:200,000 series).3 Is creation of the GMJ Type 2 Basic Research?Question and comment (Akira Ono)There is a geological research paper entitled “Creation of seamless geological map of Japan at the scale of 1:200,000 and its distribution on the web” in Synthesiology Vol. 1, No. 2. Referring to the “Discussion with Reviewers” at the end of the paper, “5. Researches on geological maps” contains a discussion of whether the creation of the GMJ should be considered Type 2 Basic Research or Type 1 Basic Research. What does the author of this paper think about this?Even if the geological data of the original outcrop may be the same, the geological maps may be created quite differently, depending on the knowledge and understanding of individual geologists. If the content of the geological map depends greatly on these attributes of individual researchers, this may have a negative influence on the reliability of the map. Reliability may be improved by introducing some standard procedures for geological map creation, including a reviewing process by third parties. What is the current status for this? Please tell us if the author has any insight on this matter.Answer (Makoto Saito)1) In Synthesiology Vol. 1, No. 2, the authors state in their “Introduction” that the GMJ represents Type 1 Basic Research and production of a seamless geological map represents Type 2 Basic Research. They also suggest that the valley of death represents a “situation when the data become hard to use because they are drawn based on an old geological model.” In the final paragraph of the “Introduction,” they state that although the compilation of geological maps has aspects of Type 2 Basic Research, it tends to represent basic research that incorporates advanced research results and, therefore, aspects of Type 1 Basic Research are more prominent. On the other hand, in “Discussion with Reviewers,” a reviewer states that “there is inconsistency in the logical development to say all geological surveys up to now are Type 1” and “it has elements of both Type 1 and Type 2 … and it is grounded in Type 2.” However, the lead author denies that it is grounded in Type 2 Basic Research. To support his argument, he states that the essence of “Type 2 Basic Research” is to extract a generalized methodology to realize a social value, and this was not carried out in the production of their geological map.I think the different perspectives of the head author and the reviewer depend on their different research careers. The lead author was involved in the creation of the GMJ and the reviewer was a user of geological maps. I do not agree with the reviewer’s view that GMJ is grounded in Type 2 Basic Research, but, unlike the lead author, I do not think it is essential that a geological map extracts a generalized methodology to realize a social value for it to be considered Type 2 Basic Research. I think the important element of Type 2 Basic Research is that the knowledge is presented in a form that can be directly used by society.The outcome report (Reference 7) shows that there are several ways in which the GMJ is used. These include cases where particular content of the GMJ, or the entire GMJ, is used directly by an end user, and other cases where, for example, a consultant company extracts information from the GMJ directly but then provides that information to a client. In this case, the information

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です