3.099 5.

Article

ArcStereoNet: A New ArcGIS®

Toolbox for Projection and Analysis
of Meso- and Micro-Structural Data

Gaetano Ortolano, Alberto D’Agostino, Mario Pagano, Roberto Visalli, Michele Zucali, Eugenio Fazio,
Ian Alsop and Rosolino Cirrincione

Special Issue
Application of Geology and GIS
Edited by
Dr. Peter Blišťan

https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10020050
 International Journal of
Geo-Information

Article
ArcStereoNet: A New ArcGIS® Toolbox for Projection and
Analysis of Meso- and Micro-Structural Data
Gaetano Ortolano 1 , Alberto D’Agostino 1, * , Mario Pagano 1 , Roberto Visalli 1 , Michele Zucali 2 ,
Eugenio Fazio 1 , Ian Alsop 3 and Rosolino Cirrincione 1

1 Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences, University of Catania, Corso Italia,
57, 95129 Catania, Italy; ortolano@unict.it (G.O.); mario.pagano@unict.it (M.P.); rvisalli@unict.it (R.V.);
efazio@unict.it (E.F.); r.cirrincione@unict.it (R.C.)
2 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 34, 20133 Milan, Italy;
michele.zucali@unimi.it
3 School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3UE, UK; ian.alsop@abdn.ac.uk
* Correspondence: alberto.d’agostino@phd.unict.it; Tel.: +39-(095)-7195-738

Abstract: ArcStereoNet is a new ArcGIS® based toolbox for stereographic projections that we imple-
ment here using Python 2.7 programming language. The reason to develop another stereographic
projection package arises from the recent use of Python as an exclusive programming language
within the ArcGIS® environment. This permits a more flexible approach for the development of tools
with very intuitive GUIs, and also allows the user to take full advantage of all potential GIS mapping
processes. The core of this new projections toolbox is based on the capability to easily apply and
compare most of the commonly used statistical methods for cluster and girdle analysis of structural
data. In addition to the well-known Fisher, K-means, and Bingham data elaborations, a completely





 new algorithm for cluster analysis and mean vector extraction (Mean Extractor from Azimuthal
Data), was developed, thereby allowing a more reliable interpretation of any possible structural data
Citation: Ortolano, G.; D’Agostino,
A.; Pagano, M.; Visalli, R.; Zucali, M.;
distribution. Furthermore, as in any other GIS platform, users can always precisely correlate each
Fazio, E.; Alsop, I.; Cirrincione, R. single projected data point with the corresponding geographical/locality position, thereby merging
ArcStereoNet: A New ArcGIS® or subdividing groups of structural stations with a simple selection procedure. ArcStereoNet also
Toolbox for Projection and Analysis creates rose diagrams, which may be applied not only to fault/joint planes orientation data, but also
of Meso- and Micro-Structural Data. for the analysis of 2D microstructural fabric parameters. These include geometrical datasets derived
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50. from the minimum bounding approach as applied to vectorized grains in thin sections. Finally,
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10020050 several customization settings ensure high-quality graphic outputs of plots, that also allow easy
vector graphics post-processing.
Academic Editor: Peter Blišt’an
Received: 30 November 2020
Keywords: stereoplots; ArcGIS® ; Python; rose diagrams; structural geology; orientation data; fab-
Accepted: 23 January 2021
ric analysis
Published: 26 January 2021

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in
1. Introduction
published maps and institutional affil-
iations. Structural geology, geotechnics, crystallography, and petrography as well as other geosci-
entific disciplines have always had the necessity to process large amounts of three-dimensional
data (e.g., foliations, fault planes, joints, crystallographic orientations, and so on) that are used
to extrapolate statistically meaningful quantitative parameters [1–10]. The equal-angle (a.k.a.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
‘Wulff net’) and the equal-area (a.k.a. ‘Schmidt net’) azimuthal projections, generally referred
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
to as stereoplots or stereonets, are powerful graphical tools portraying 3D orientation data
This article is an open access article
in two dimensions, thus, simplifying their interpretation [11–13]. Although in the common
distributed under the terms and geological language the term, ‘stereographic projections’ is often used to generically indicate
conditions of the Creative Commons both equal-area and equal-angle azimuthal projections, formally it should be used only to
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// refer to the latter [14,15].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Such projection types allow the angles between lines and planes to be determined,
4.0/). but the relative geographical coordinates of such data in real space (e.g., rock volume) is

ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10020050 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijgi

ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 2 of 32

lost [16]. Consequently, the main issue regarding the use of stereonets is linked to the loss
of spatial information of the projected data, for example the relative geographical position
between two families of foliations, or the spatial relationship between minerals observed
in the same thin section [17].
Several pieces of software have recently been developed for the digital and semi-
automatic realisation of stereoplots, such as Rick Allmendinger’s Stereonet [18], Orient [19–21],
or Dips® by Rocscience Inc. Some of these programmes include a huge number of useful
tools, such as those for statistical analysis, for rotation and transformation functions, as well
as for kinematic analysis or stress field orientation analysis. However, most programmes,
with the exception of Orient, do not include geospatial analysis features and cannot, there-
fore, effectively link the orientation data with its corresponding spatial information and
geological database. Over the years, several authors have tried to solve this problem by
designing stereoplots software or ‘add-ins’ to specifically exploit the geospatial analysis
functionalities running on well-known GIS platforms such as ArcGIS® or QGIS® . Unlike
ArcGIS® , QGIS® is distributed with an open source license, therefore, plugins development
and sharing within the users’ community is highly encouraged. Thus, a lot of examples
of structural geology and orientation data analysis plugins for QGIS® can be found and
downloaded online. Some of the best-known plugins include qgSurf [22] and GeoTrace [23],
both coded in Python.
Within the ArcGIS® environment, Knox-Robinson and Gardoll [17] were the first to
implement a stereonet plotting functionality for ArcView 3.0 GIS (an ESRI predecessor
of modern ArcMap® ), thus, becoming the forerunners of such types of tools. With the
development of ArcMap® , compatible toolbars and further add-ins were designed such as
the Export Toolbox [24], written in Visual Basic for Applications (VBA), that integrated a
spatial averaging routine in ArcMap® 8.2. The more recent OATools [25] is an ArcMap® add-
in (for versions 10.2 and 10.3), always written in Visual Basic.NET (VB.NET) using Microsoft
Visual Studio (2010) with ArcObjects, a developer kit for ArcGIS® for the definition of
the Graphical User Interface (GUI). This last add-in combines GIS functionalities with
orientation and statistical analysis such as the creation of density distribution diagrams
and the calculation of mean vectors and fold axes.
In this scenario, we introduce here ArcStereoNet (ASN), a new Python-toolbox, com-
patible with the latest distributions of ArcMap® (versions 10.1+), that merges the main
ArcGIS® features with the semi-automatic realisation of stereoplots. It takes as input the
orientation data (linear and planar features in table format) imported or created inside
ArcMap® , taking advantage of its built-in functionalities of data storage and managing.
In such a way, the users can at any time, within their GIS project, precisely visualise the
plotted data together with the corresponding geographical/locality position. The main
ASN features also include the extrapolation of statistical parameters, the application of
density contour functions and the creation of rose diagrams. Moreover, the toolbox encom-
passes a considerable number of plot personalisation parameters that ensure high-quality
publication-ready graphics, or that can be further modified with image editing software,
thanks to the supported vector image output formats.
The purpose of this work is to provide a tool capable of seamlessly combining and
filling the gap between geological spatial orientation data and their georeferenced position,
without losing valuable information. Moreover, by including a collection of statistical
functionalities quickly applicable within ArcMap® itself, ASN avoids the use of several
software packages when working with oriented georeferenced data. We provide a com-
parison between such statistical analyses by taking a field structural dataset from folds
exposed in the Macduff area of NE Scotland as a case study. In this work, we also show how
ArcMap® equipped with ASN can be a valuable instrument for the simultaneous study of
structural oriented data from mesoscale to microscale, using the geo and petro-structural
data collected within the Palmi Shear Zone [4,26] as a practical operative example.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 3 of 32

2. Methods
ArcMap® takes advantage of a Python 2.7.x version, installed with the software itself,
to access and manipulate geo-databases and automatize various internal processes. Expert
users can run Python commands directly from the Python console. Nonetheless, ArcGIS®
provides various ‘ready-to-run’ toolboxes, that can also be chained together with custom
Python scripts in order to realise personalised executables (i.e., Model Builder) [2,27–29].
In a recent addition, ArcGIS® allows coding of fully customised toolboxes, namely ‘Python-
toolboxes’, by means of the arcpy library.
ASN (available as Supplementary Material—S1) is a Python-toolbox capable of realis-
ing lower-hemisphere azimuthal projections and rose diagrams starting from oriented data,
thanks to the implementation of an external Python library (i.e., mplstereonet), developed
within an opensource Python project [30]. This library is based on Matplotlib, a well know
external Python graphics package used for application development, interactive scripting,
and publication-quality image generation across user interfaces and operating systems [31].
ASN also takes advantage of NumPy, another external Python library useful for scientific
and technical computing [32] and several modules within the Python Standard Library
such as ctypes, os, subprocess, sys, and more. Since ASN is a Python-toolbox, it has a fully
ArcGIS® -supported GUI; users that habitually utilise ArcGIS® toolboxes will notice that
the GUI is very similar to that of any other ArcGIS® tool.
The toolbox contains three different tools: ‘Stereoplots’, ‘Rose Diagrams’, and ‘Graph
to Hyperlink’. Starting from oriented data, imported or created inside ArcMap® as an
ESRI shapefile, ASN can carry out stereonet- (‘Stereoplots’ tool) or rose diagram- plotting
(‘Rose Diagrams’ tool) of selected records, stored within the corresponding attribute table
(Figure 1). The ‘Graph to Hyperlink’ tool is useful to connect the realised plots with the
geographic position of the plotted data, via hyperlink.

Figure 1. Example of ArcMap® (version 10.6.1) equipped with ArcStereoNet. After creating a shapefile
storing oriented data (a) and selecting the records stored inside its attribute table (b), the user can open
the ArcStereoNet toolbox (c) from the ArcToolbox window and choose the preferred tool.

The ‘Stereoplots’ tool requires the following inputs: the orientation data shapefile as
well as four fields within its attribute table (see Figure 1b), which contains respectively
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 4 of 32

azimuthal values, inclination values, measurement sampling methods (RHR, Dip direc-
tion/Dip, etc.), and feature types. To get the most out of ASN, it is recommended to rename
these four fields as follows:
• Azimuth—here, azimuthal values (i.e., direction, dip direction, or trend) are stored as
numeric values.
• Dip Angle or Dip_Angle—here, inclination values (i.e., dip or plunge) are stored as
numeric values.
• Method—here, the data format must be specified as text values, choosing from ‘RHR’,
‘DD,’ and ‘TP’ (must be written in uppercase), indicating, respectively, the following
conventional sampling methods: RHR—Right Hand Rule, DD—Dip Direction/Dip,
and TP—Trend-Plunge. ASN can plot together RHR and DD data, calculating the
following azimuth conversion equation:

RHR = (DD − 90) mod 360, (1)

with ‘mod’ indicating the modulo operator.

• Type—Here, the user should indicate the feature type as text values (e.g., ‘Main Folia-
tion’, ‘Stretching Lineation’, ‘Axial Plane’ etc.). Such information is not mandatory,
though highly recommended. It is functional for the legend labels but also guides
the toolbox to a correct grouping and graphical representation of the different types
of data. When differences between facing directions of orientation data need to be
highlighted (e.g., beddings with distinguishing between normal and overturned po-
sitions), this field can be populated with distinct entries (e.g., ‘Bedding normal’ and
‘Bedding overturned’), thus, prompting the tool to treat such data separately.
These suggested fieldnames can be written without taking care of uppercase/lowercase
characters and their order in the attribute table is totally irrelevant. Other fields can also
be added in the attribute table according to the users’ needs and preferences. If users
follow such suggestions, the tool will automatically fill the required input boxes with the
correct fieldname. Otherwise, they can still fill them manually through a drop-down menu
showing all the suitable fieldnames of the given shapefile. The ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool has a
simplified input fields requirement, as it only requires the Azimuth and the Type fields to
be provided.
Once users have created the oriented data shapefile, they can select the portion of
data that needs to be plotted, taking advantage of the various selection tools provided by
ArcMap® , and then open the ASN toolbox and choose the desired tool (see Figure 1c). If
users do not operate any data selection, the whole dataset will be considered.
The ‘Graph To Hyperlink’ tool requires as input the plots that have been generated
with the previous tools and will create a new shapefile containing hyperlinks to such
images together with their related geographic position. As a result, users can visualise the
graphs popping up from a map at the corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates.

2.1. Azimuthal Projections

The ‘Stereoplots’ tool (Figure 2) is used to obtain lower hemisphere equal area or equal
angle azimuthal projections showing cyclographic traces, and/or poles for the selected
planar measurements, and/or points for the linear elements. The plottable orientation data
can be selected through the drop-down menu of the ‘Plot Cyclographic Traces, Poles, and
Vectors’ option, where it is grouped by feature type. Once added, data will be stacked
inside the underlying table-like box (see Figure 2c). For each additional oriented data type,
the user can fully customise its graphical appearance in stereoplot by setting parameters
such as colour, shape, and size of lines and symbols. This type of ArcGIS® multivalue input
system, consisting of a drop-down menu and a table-like box below, is called ‘Value Table’.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 5 of 32

Figure 2. ‘Stereoplots’ tool layout. Green dots indicate required parameters. (a) Oriented dataset input; requires a shapefile
(point, line, and polygon features types are supported). (b) Azimuth, Dip Angle, Method, and Type fields inputs, selectable
through the drop-down menus. (c) Plotting data Value Table; for each added feature type the user can specify the plotting
colour, pole, or vector symbol and size, cyclographic trace style, and width. (d) Output image settings; the stereoplot can be
saved as a temporary file by unchecking the ‘Store Image Output’ option, otherwise an output file path can be selected. (e)
‘Contour & Statistics’ submenu; see Figure 3 for details. (f) Plot customisation submenu; enables the look of stereoplot to
be customised. (g) Plotting options submenu; the stereonet type can be chosen (equal-area or equal-angle) and the ‘Write
Log File’ option can be checked to prompt the tool to compile a text file storing statistical information concerning the
plotted data.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 6 of 32

Figure 3. Expanded ‘Contour & Statistics’ submenu of ‘Stereoplots’ tool. (a) ‘Apply Contour’ Value Table; the user can
choose the preferred contour density function under the ‘Method’ column, and set other parameters such as standard
deviation, style, colour, and transparency. (b) Show a colour bar referred to the applied contour. (c) ‘Extract Mean Vectors’
Value Table; the algorithm-control parameters are ‘Algorithm’, to choose the preferred algorithm, ‘Number of Clusters’,
Azimuth and Inclination tolerances and ‘Fisher confidence’. The other parameters gather settings for graphic appearance.
(d) Track Mean Extractor from Azimuthal Data (M.E.A.D.) clustering behaviour option will only apply on clusters extracted
by mean of the M.E.A.D. clustering process (see “‘Stereoplots’ tool algorithms” subparagraph for details).

Within the ‘Stereoplots’ tool, density contour functions and statistical analysis are also
available and can be accessed by expanding the ‘Contour & Statistics’ submenu (Figure 3).
Two more Value Tables, named ‘Apply Contour’ and ‘Extract Mean Vectors’, respectively,
will appear. Their working principles are the same as those expressed above.
The ‘Apply Contour’ Value Table allows the user to show the orientation density distri-
bution of selected data. The tool uses a modified Kamb contour function with exponential
smoothing [18] by default. However, other density contour functions such as the modified
Kamb with linear smoothing, with inverse square smoothing [19], without smoothing
(‘traditional’ Kamb function [33]) and ‘Schmidt’ (a.k.a. 1% method) are also available and
can be chosen under the ‘Method’ column of the Value Table. Other parameters that may be
customised are the standard deviation (σ), set by default to 2, and the desired contour style
(filled or unfilled), colour, and transparency. By checking the underlying ‘Show Contour
Colorbar’ checkbox, a colour bar linked to the density contour function will appear in the
plot as well.
The ‘Extract Mean Vectors’ Value Table allows the user to calculate and show the
mean vectors of the selected data, choosing between several clustering and mean vector
extracting algorithms. The user is totally free to extract the mean vectors from various data
types, also using different algorithms, at the same time. Other customisable parameters are
the number of expected clusters for that specific data type (i.e., how many families does the
user expect the orientation data types to be divided into), some specific algorithm-related
parameters that will be discussed in detail in Section 2.1.1 (together with the different
algorithms description), and the same graphical plotting features previously described (i.e.,
colour, shape, and size of lines and symbols).
The ‘Plot Customisation’ and the ‘Plotting Options’ submenus (Figure 2f,g) gather
secondary parameters such as the output figure title label, the option to show a legend, the
number and style of tick marks, the net type (Schmidt or Wulff), and more. A noteworthy
parameter under the ‘Plotting Options’ submenu is the ‘Write Log File’ checkbox. This
option can be checked to prompt the tool to compile a log text file (.txt), where some useful
statistical information about the results of functions applied to data is stored. It is highly
recommended that users select this if they have extracted mean vectors from plotted data
and/or applied a density contour function.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 7 of 32

2.1.1. ‘Stereoplots’ Tool Algorithms

Almost all of the algorithms used by the ‘Stereoplots’ tool to extract statistical parame-
ters from oriented data consist of two main processes: the clustering process (i.e., a function
that splits data into a user-defined number of families) and the mean vector extracting
process (i.e., a function that extracts the mean azimuth and dip values from a given family
of data). The ‘Extract Mean Vectors’ Value Table within the tool allows the user to choose
the preferred algorithm, through the ‘Algorithm’ parameter (see Figure 3c). The available
choices are labelled as: Mean Extractor from Azimuthal Data (M.E.A.D.), M.E.A.D. + Fisher,
K-means, Bingham.
The M.E.A.D. algorithm acronym stands for ‘Mean Extractor from Azimuthal Data’; it
is designed ex novo and presented here for the first time (see Figure 4). The arithmetic mean
formula is not always functional to extract a correct mean vector from azimuthal datasets,
since each oriented feature (planar or linear) is defined by a couple of values (azimuth-
inclination). Moreover, a ‘wrap-around’ problem could also occur, i.e., the overlapping
of the values 0 and 360 in a circumference. The M.E.A.D. algorithm deals with such
mathematical issues by taking as input the orientation data expressed as a list of azimuth-
dip couples (i.e., strike-dip for planar features or trend-plunge for linear features), a
user-defined number of clusters and two user-controlled tolerance percentage values,
ranging from 0 to 100. The azimuth-dip couples are automatically extracted by the tool
from the orientation data, the required number of clusters can be set by the user through
the third Value Table parameter (named ‘Number of Clusters’; see Figure 3c) and the
two tolerance values can be adjusted through the fourth and fifth Value Table parameters
(i.e., ‘M.E.A.D. Azimuth tolerance and ‘M.E.A.D. Inclination tolerance’). These last two
parameters will be taken into consideration by the tool only if one of the M.E.A.D. or the
M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithms has been selected, otherwise they will simply be skipped
during the tool execution phase.

Figure 4. Mean Extractor from Azimuthal Data (M.E.A.D.) algorithm flow chart. Ovals indicate input/output objects,
squares indicate algorithm subprocesses. The azimuth-dip couples are first sorted by most frequent azimuth value (pre-
clustering); then the clustering subprocess is applied, taking care of the user-controlled tolerance parameters. The raw
output is then refined in a post-clustering phase and the required number of clusters is returned. Finally, these are fed into
the mean vector extracting process that outputs the final result, consisting of one or more mean vectors.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 8 of 32

Consequently, the M.E.A.D. clustering process tries to group data into the user-defined
number of families (i.e., the ‘Number of Clusters’ parameter). Such a procedure can be
divided into three subprocesses (see Figure 4):
• Pre-clustering. In this subprocess the azimuth frequencies are calculated, then nor-
malized in relation to their maximum value, and finally the azimuth-dip couples are
sorted by normalized azimuth frequency.
• Clustering. This an iterative subprocess, where the sorted azimuth-dip couples are
analysed multiple times in order to group them together. With azimuth and dip values
of the first couple representing the starting median values, each couple is compared
with them and, if they do not diverge by more than a threshold value, they are grouped
together and the median values are consequently refreshed. This is computed as:

|sin αi − sin α∗ | ≤ t1 ; (2)

|cos αi − cos α∗ | ≤ t1 ; (3)

|sin δi − sin δ∗ | ≤ t2 ; (4)
where αi and δi are the azimuth and dip values of the i-th couple, while α* and δ* are
the current azimuth and dip median values, respectively. Both the sine and the cosine
differences (Equations (2) and (3)) are needed for azimuth values, because a numerical
value ranging from 0 to 360 can be unequivocally expressed only by considering both
its sine and cosine contemporaneously. Instead, as the dip value ranges between 0
and 90, just one of its sine and cosine values is sufficient (Equation (4)). The maximum
value for the azimuth threshold (t1 ) is 2, while for the inclination threshold (t2 ) it is
1, as the sine function ranges between −1 and 1 for azimuth values and between 0
and 1 for the dip values. The clustering subprocess is reiterated until no more clusters
can be extracted; the remaining couples, if present, are considered as spurious. An
important role here is covered by the azimuth and inclination tolerances set by the
user through the corresponding Value Table parameters (Figure 3c), as the thresholds
(t1 and t2 ) are proportional to such values. Experimental tests show that even a small
variation of tolerance values can sometimes determine significant variations on the
result. It is possible for the users to quickly test different tolerance values multiple
times, by unchecking the ‘Store Image Output’ option (Figure 2d). In this way, they can
obtain the graphical result that best suits their needs and preferences without wasting
memory space. Another useful option to check is the ‘Track M.E.A.D. Behaviour’
(Figure 3d), which plots the clustered data (poles or lines) with different symbols (e.g.,
symbol ‘1′ for data that falls into the first cluster, ‘2′ for second cluster, no symbol
for spurious data, etc.). This can be helpful to understand the actual influence of
the user-controlled parameters on the clustering process and to simplify their setup
(Figure 5).
• Post-clustering. This subprocess performs a post-filtering operation, double-checking
all extracted families and returning as output only the number of clusters required by
the user, selecting the most populated ones. If such a number is higher than the actual
number of families extracted by the clustering process, the function will return all the
obtained clusters.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 9 of 32

Figure 5. Influence of azimuth and inclination tolerance parameters on the M.E.A.D. clustering process, highlighted with
‘Track M.E.A.D. behaviour’ option (Figure 3d). (a) Two-clusters model with an azimuth tolerance of 20% and an inclination
tolerance of 30%. Almost all plotted data is grouped into two different clusters (1 and 2). (b) Two-clusters model with an
azimuth tolerance of 13% and an inclination tolerance of 10%. Extracted clusters tend to be less dispersed and, consequently,
much more data is evaluated as spurious (i.e., not gathered within any cluster).

Results obtained by the clustering process are used as input for the mean vector
extracting process (Figure 4), to calculate the average azimuth and dip values for each
cluster. This is carried out by first converting the azimuth values from degrees to radians
and then summing together all of their sines and cosines, respectively. Consequently, the
2-argument arctangent function is applied on such summations and the output is firstly
converted back to degrees and then the modulo 360 is applied:
!!
n n
θ = deg arctan2 ∑ sin αi , ∑ cos αi mod 360, (5)
i=1 i=1

where αi represents the i-th azimuth value, expressed in radians, within the n-elements
cluster and θ is the mean angle expressed in degrees. The inclination average value, instead,
is calculated by applying the arithmetic mean formula, as the inclination values range from
0 to 90 and do not ‘wrap-around’. This computation is applied for each cluster obtained by
the clustering process.
The M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithm merges the M.E.A.D. clustering process with the
Fisher mean vector extracting function [34] implemented within the mplstereonet package
(see the mplstereonet documentation [35] for details). In addition to the mean vector(s), this
function also generates three statistic parameters: The R value (i.e., the magnitude of each
mean vector as a number between 0 and 1), the confidence radius (i.e., the opening angle
of a small circle that corresponds to the confidence in the calculated direction), and the K
value (i.e., the dispersion factor that quantifies the amount of dispersion of the given data).
All these statistics will be stored in the log file if the user enables the ‘Write Log File’ option
(Figure 2g). As the clustering process is still carried out by the M.E.A.D. algorithm, the two
tolerance parameters will influence the result. In addition, the ‘Fisher confidence’ value
(i.e., the sixth Value Table parameter; see Figure 3c) will also be taken into account during
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 10 of 32

the execution stage of the tool. Such a parameter consists of a percentage value ranging
from 0 to 99 (defaults to 95) that influences the above-mentioned confidence radius. A
related confidence cone (or small circle), bearing an opening angle equal to the confidence
radius value, will eventually be plotted on the stereoplot.
The K-means algorithm is also implemented within the mplstereonet package (see
the mplstereonet documentation [35] for details) and consists of a k-means approach [36],
modified for spherical measurements. As for the M.E.A.D., it includes both a clustering and
a mean vector extracting processes. The main differences between these two algorithms lie
within the iterative clustering function that starts from random points for the ASN K-means
algorithm and from the most frequent azimuthal values for the M.E.A.D. Moreover, the
K-means clustering iterative process is set up according to the required number of clusters
(i.e., it is influenced by that number) while the M.E.A.D. makes use of such parameter only
after the entire clustering subprocess is completed (see Figure 4). Finally, the K-means
algorithm works with data expressed in matrix form and converted in spherical coordinates,
unlike the M.E.A.D. algorithm that works with the sines and cosines of angular data.
As with Fisher algorithm, the Bingham algorithm derives from a well-known prob-
ability distribution on the sphere [37] implemented inside the mplstereonet package (see
the mplstereonet documentation [35] for details). This function differs from the previous
ones, as it does not feature a clustering process. It aims to find the best fit plane (and/or its
related pole) of a ‘girdle-like’ distribution pattern (poles of planes or lines). Therefore, the
‘Number of Clusters’ parameter will be ignored during the tool execution if this algorithm
has been selected. The influences of the user-controlled parameters on each algorithm are
summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. Influences of user-controlled parameters on ArcStereoNet (ASN) algorithms. An ‘X’ symbol

means that the parameter (row) has an effect on the algorithm (column).

M.E.A.D. + Fisher M.E.A.D. K-Means Bingham

Number of Clusters X X X -
M.E.A.D. Azimuth tolerance X X - -
M.E.A.D. Inclination tolerance X X - -
Fisher Confidence X - - -

2.2. Rose Diagrams

The ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool is useful to generate weighted and unweighted rose dia-
grams. Its GUI structure (Figure 6) is very similar to the ‘Stereoplots’ tool. As noted above,
the input fields are here only the Azimuth and the Type fields. The ‘Data to be plotted’ Value
Table contains four parameters that may be customised (see Figure 6c). The first one (i.e.,
‘Colors’) allows the user to choose the colour of the diagram bars while the others can be
used to extract a specific number of mean vectors of plotted data. Any mean vector will be
shown in the plot with an arrow oriented along the mean direction, the length of which is
proportional to the mean resultant length (ranging between 0 and 1). While the ‘Plot Cus-
tomisation’ submenu gathers more or less the same types of parameters as the ‘Stereoplots’
tool, the ‘Plotting Options’ submenu here offers some unique parameters. The ‘Mirrored
Behaviour’ checkbox can be selected to show a specular rose diagram, thus, plotting both
the vectors directions carried by the azimuthal data input and the corresponding opposite
vectors directions (i.e., pairs of supplementary angles). Since this option makes sense only
if plotted data covers a range less than or equal to 180 degrees, the tool will automatically
check if such a condition is satisfied. If it is not, a warning message will pop up. Another
useful additional parameter is the ‘Weighted Rose Diagram’ checkbox. If checked, the user
must then indicate which field the data should be weighted to, through the drop-down
menu of the input box below. The ‘Write Log File’ parameter shares the same features
described for the ‘Stereoplots’ tool.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 11 of 32

Figure 6. ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool layout. Green dots indicate required parameters. (a) Oriented dataset input; requires a
shapefile (point, line, and polygon features types are supported). (b) Azimuth and Type fields inputs, selectable through
the drop-down menus. (c) Plotting data Value Table; for each added feature type, the user can specify the bar colour and
whether to show the mean vectors or not, with a determined number of clusters and azimuth tolerance. (d) Output image
settings; the rose diagram can be saved as a temporary file by unchecking the ‘Store Image Output’ option, otherwise an
output file path can be selected. (e) Plot customisation submenu; rose diagram look can be here customised. (f) Plotting
options submenu; ‘Mirrored behaviour’ option allows to prompt for a specular rose diagram, ‘Weighted Rose Diagram’
option allows the user to weight data (a weight field must be provided). The ‘Write Log File’ option can be checked to
prompt the tool to compile a text file storing statistical information concerning the plotted data.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 12 of 32

‘Rose Diagrams’ Tool Algorithms

The ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool makes use of a modified M.E.A.D. algorithm for the extrac-
tion of mean vectors. The clustering process differs from normal M.E.A.D. for the absence
of the inclination tolerance parameter, here becoming meaningless. The user can still set the
‘Number of Clusters’ and the ‘M.E.A.D. Azimuth tolerance’ parameters within the ‘Data
to be plotted’ Value Table (Figure 6c). The mean vector extracting process is also slightly
modified. In addition to the mathematical formula at (5), which is useful to extract the
mean azimuth direction (θ), the following equation is calculated for each cluster as well:
v
u !2 !2
u n n
R= t ∑ sin αi + ∑ cos αi , (6)
i=1 i=1

where αi is the i-th azimuth value within the n-elements cluster. Here, R is the mean
resultant length (ranging between 0 and 1), and its value determines the length of the arrow
representing the mean vector on the plot. If the ‘Mirrored Behaviour’ option is selected,
the supplementary mean azimuth direction (θ’) is also computed for each cluster and R is
represented on the plot as a double-headed arrow, pointing towards both mean vectors
directions. If the user prompts for a weighted rose diagram, the magnitude of the selected
weights must be evaluated within the calculation of the mean vectors. Therefore, Equations
(5) and (6) become, respectively:
 n
∑i=1 sin(αi )·wi ∑ni=1 cos(αi )·wi
 
θ = deg arctan2 , mod 360; (7)
∑ni=1 wi ∑ni=1 wi
s 2 2
∑ni=1 sin(αi )·wi ∑ni=1 cos(αi )·wi

R= + , (8)
∑ni=1 wi ∑ni=1 wi
with wi representing the i-th weight value associated to each azimuth value (αi ) within the
n-elements cluster.

2.3. Output Images

The users can save the stereoplot or rose diagram images they have produced by
clicking on the ‘Output Image’ parameter present in both tools (see Figures 2d and 6d)
and then selecting a file path and one of the following available file extensions: ‘.png’,
‘.eps’, ‘.pdf’, ‘.pgf’, ‘.ps’, ‘.raw’, ‘.rgba’, ‘.svg’, ‘.svgz’. The resolution can be set with a DPI
value ranging from 0 to 600 (200 is the default value). The image file can also be saved
as a temporary file by unchecking the ‘Store Image Output’ parameter. In such a way,
the tool will save a PNG file into the ArcGIS® default scratch folder and automatically
open it with the default local image viewer. If the user also requires the log file, it will be
saved as a temporary file and automatically opened too. These files will be deleted by ASN
immediately after the user prompts for a new temporary image.
The ‘Graph To Hyperlink’ tool can be used to link the realised graphs to their related
spatial positions in the map (Figure 7). Each position corresponds to the mean latitude and
longitude coordinates (a.k.a. the centroid) of the dataset from which the related graph was
extracted. This tool takes as input the plots as raster images and outputs a new punctual
shapefile, where each record stores a graph file path and its corresponding latitude and
longitude coordinates.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 13 of 32

Figure 7. Graph To Hyperlink tool. (a) Tool layout; one or multiple raster images are required as input. Such images are
meant to be stereoplots or rose diagrams realised by the ASN related tools. An output feature class is also required; here,
the spatial information and the hyperlinks to each image is stored. (b) Example of Graph To Hyperlink result. Green circles
indicate four different sampling stations; the corresponding plots pop out from each of them.

3. ASN Worked Examples

ASN was tested with several oriented datasets during the design phase. We here select
two case studies involving the Macduff area of NE Scotland [38] and the Palmi Shear Zone
of Calabria in southern Italy [4,26]. These case studies provide a comparison to showcase
the various ASN statistical algorithms, and are an example of the simultaneous study of
oriented structural data from the mesoscale to microscale, respectively.

3.1. Macduff Case Study: Algorithms Comparison

The geology of the Macduff area in NE Scotland forms part of the Dalradian Supergroup
that is a late Pre-Cambrian to Cambrian sedimentary sequence that was subsequently de-
formed and variably metamorphosed during the Early–Mid Ordovician Grampian Orogeny
at 475–465 Ma [39,40]. The Macduff area (UK Grid: NJ7190 6465) comprises sandstones
and mudstones that originally formed deep water turbidite fans and were subsequently
regionally metamorphosed to biotite facies during the Grampian Orogeny [39–41]. Struc-
turally, the Macduff area is dominated by NNE-trending upright anticlines and synclines that
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 14 of 32

develop at wavelengths of meters to hundreds of metres [38]. The relatively low metamorphic
grade and varied lithologies allow bedding and cleavage to be readily identified around the
gently-plunging folds, that are cut across and exposed by the E-W trending coastline [38,41]
(Figure 8).

Figure 8. Field photograph of a NNE-trending upright synform that folds bedding (highlighted in yel-
low) and develops a broadly axial-planar cleavage (in green). (Macduff area: UK Grid: NJ7190 6465).

The dataset consists of 40 bedding measurements (see Tables A1 and A2 in Appendix A)

that were collected using a geological compass from fold limbs that were already grouped
by the field investigator into two different families (i.e., west and east limbs of the NNE
trending anticlines). We simulated three different ways of approaching the problem with
ASN in order to extract the mean planes that best define the whole dataset. Since field
investigations do not always allow an easy distinction between two or more families of data,
the first two simulations ignored the data differentiation identified by the field investigator,
labelling all data as generic ‘Fold limb’ (Table A1). However, the third simulation considers
such user-driven data distinction from around the folds (Table A2).
For the first simulation (Figure 9), the algorithm-control parameters are set to default,
except for the number of clusters. The M.E.A.D. clustering-based algorithms converge,
while the K-means only share the same mean strike values with them. The Bingham
algorithm confirms this result, as the best fit pole coincides with the mean cyclographic
traces intersections, indicating the fold axis. The greatest difference lies in the mean dip
values extracted by the K-means algorithm, which would suggest a larger interlimb angle
and a more asymmetrical fold. This can be attributed to the clustering approach of K-means,
which tries to ‘force’ all data to cluster into the user-defined number of clusters. Instead,
the M.E.A.D. algorithm tends to assemble lower dispersion clusters, thus, excluding the
spurious data. This behaviour is highly customisable by the user through the tolerance
parameters, as shown in the next simulation.
The second simulation (Figure 10) highlights the influence of control parameters on
the result, with particular emphasis on the M.E.A.D. inclination tolerance. Three possible
average inclinations for the west-dipping fold limb are highlighted. The inclination toler-
ance set for M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithm is low (i.e., 7%), and this reflects a low-dispersion
cluster extraction and, consequently, a higher number of spurious data. On the other hand,
a much higher inclination tolerance set for M.E.A.D. algorithm (i.e., 65%) leads to a more
dispersed data clustering. The K-means algorithm result differs from the others for the
same reason explained in the first simulation. A contour density function is here also
applied to help visualize the different clustering approaches of the ASN algorithms. The
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 15 of 32

Bingham best fit pole still coincides with the cyclographic traces intersection, highlighting
the fold axis.

Figure 9. Application of ArcStereoNet algorithms with default control parameters for the extraction of mean vectors from
the Macduff area dataset, treated as a single feature type. (a) ASN graphic result; (b) portion of Macduff dataset attribute
table, with all records sharing the same feature type (i.e., “Fold limb”); (c) ASN log file showing algorithm statistics and
results; and (d) “Extract Mean Vector” Value Table showing the algorithm settings.

Figure 10. Application of ArcStereoNet algorithms with customised control parameters for the extraction of mean vectors
from the Macduff area dataset, treated as a single feature type. (a) ASN graphic result; (b) portion of Macduff dataset
attribute table, with all records sharing the same feature type (i.e., ‘Fold limb’); (c) ASN log file showing algorithm statistics
and results; and (d) ‘Extract Mean Vector’ Value Table showing the algorithm settings.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 16 of 32

For the third simulation (Figure 11), the data differentiation recognised by the field
investigator is considered. This is done by specifying within the Type field of the attribute
table two different entries (i.e., ‘West limb of Anticlines’ and ‘East limb of Anticlines’).
In such a way, a data clustering is already performed by the user at outcrop and, thus,
the ‘Number of Clusters’ parameter is set to 1 for all algorithms. The most noticeable
consequence is that some of the data labelled as ‘East limb’ shows supplementary strike
values (e.g., 30 and 210 degrees) since data is expressed with the Right-Hand Rule (RHR)
method and features a high dip value. The M.E.A.D. clustering process works with sines
and cosines of azimuth values; therefore, it tends not to group together supplementary
strike values (confront Equations (2) and (3)). Consequently, the single cluster required
by the user only gathers the SE-dipping east limb records (i.e., the most numerous) and
the extracted mean cyclographic trace shows a less steep dip value. Conversely, the K-
means algorithm works with data expressed in matrix form and converted in spherical
coordinates, and tries to group all east limb records within the single cluster. This leads to
the extraction of a steeper dipping mean cyclographic trace.

Figure 11. Application of ArcStereoNet algorithms with customised control parameters for the extraction of mean vectors
from the Macduff area dataset, grouped in two different feature types. (a) ASN graphic result; (b) portion of Macduff
dataset attribute table, with records displaying two different feature types (i.e., ‘East limb of Anticlines’ and ‘West limb of
Anticlines’); (c) ASN log file showing algorithm statistics and results; and (d) ‘Extract Mean Vector’ Value Table showing the
algorithm settings.

3.2. Palmi Shear Zone Case Study: Mesostructural and Microstructural Data Comparison
The Palmi Shear Zone (PSZ) [4,26] is a roughly E-W trending strike-slip high-strain
zone, a few hundred meters in thickness, with a pervasive ductile deformation starting
in the Paleocene (57 Ma [42]). The PSZ is located in the southern sector of the Calabria-
Peloritani Orogen (CPO), in southern Italy [43] (Figure 12a). Here, an alternance of highly
foliated calcsilicates with subordinate mylonitic migmatitic paragneiss and mylonitic
tonalites occurs. The 400 m wide mylonitic horizon extends inland for about 1500 m,
forming, with a prevalent subvertical foliation, along the contact between Late-Hercynian
tonalites to the south and a high grade Hercynian metamorphic complex to the north (i.e.,
restitic paragneisses; migmatites and amphibolites [4]).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 17 of 32

According to Ortolano et al. [4,44] and Cirrincione et al. [43], this subvertically foliated
mylonitic zone can be interpreted as a northward relic fragment of the anastomosed regional-
scale strike-slip system that controlled the mutual microplate movements of the Western
Mediterranean realm since the Paleocene. The strike-slip movements caused the observed
lateral juxtaposition of differently evolved crystalline basement terranes, such as those iden-
tified within the arcuate orogenic segment of the CPO. In particular, the PSZ is a segment
of the dextral strike-slip system, known as the Palmi Line [43] (Figure 12a). This structure
controlled the juxtaposition of the intensely shortened Aspromonte Massif nappe-like edifice,
characterised by the presence of a pervasive Alpine re-equilibration [3,4,26,43,45] (Figure 12a),
with the Serre Massif, forming a quasi-complete relic fragment of a Late-Palaezoic crustal
section belonging to the original southern European palaeomargin [46].

(a)

(b)

Figure 12. Geological background of the Palmi Shear Zone: (a) Geological map of the Calabrian metamorphic complexes
(after Angì et al. [46]); (b) Geological Map of the case study area of the Palmi Shear zone with trends of the main foliations
and average stretching lineations, (white circles represent location of each structural station, while red circles represent
sample locations).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 18 of 32

3.2.1. Mesostructural Data Analysis

In this section, we will consider a dataset consisting of linear and planar structures
measured using a geological compass during a field-survey campaign (Figure 11b). We
collected structural data from four different stations (the full dataset is provided in Table S2
within the Supplementary Materials), approximately aligned along a W–E oriented direction,
and named ‘Reef 1′ , ‘Reef 2′ , ‘Beach’, and ‘Malopasso’, respectively (Figures 1 and 7).
In order to test other specific characteristics of the ASN toolbox, we decided to use
just the mylonitic foliations and the stretching lineations. Axes of isoclinal or sheath folds
have been voluntarily excluded from the elaboration.
The ‘Reef 1′ station is fixed at the furthest-most sea stack with respect to the coastline.
The contoured plot of poles to mylonitic foliations (n = 112; Figure 13) was made by
applying a Kamb with linear smoothing method (standard deviation set at 1.5). It shows
a reasonably well-defined maximum of subvertical foliations that are steeply dipping
towards the SW or NE. A second minor cluster of subvertical foliations also occur dipping
toward the N-S. The mean output values for foliations are 311/74 and 316/69 (strike/dip
notation) calculated with the K-means and M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithms (azimuth tolerance
= 50%, inclination tolerance = 30%, Fisher confidence = 95%), respectively. At the same
site, the stretching lineations (n = 10) are roughly dispersed along the mean plane of the
mylonitic foliation, and display subhorizontal to moderate plunges. The Bingham best fit
plane of lineations distribution is 320/66 (strike/dip notation).

Figure 13. ‘Reef 1′ station: (a) equal-area azimuthal projection and statistical analysis of main foliations and stretching
lineations data and (b) field example of isoclinally folded foliation in mylonites (tonalites interlayered with paragneisses).
The ASN log file is provided in Appendix B (Table A3).

At the second station named ‘Reef 2′ , we collected mylonitic foliation (n = 34) as well
as stretching lineations (n = 19). Contouring of poles to foliations shows four clusters
on the stereoplot (Figure 14). Two clusters are gently dipping towards the N-S, whereas
the other two are NE and NW oriented, respectively. The M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithm
(azimuth tolerance = 30%, inclination tolerance = 30%, Fisher confidence = 95%) extracted
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 19 of 32

four size-decreasing ordered clusters (i.e., 098/67; 275/74; 036/61; 144/72) (Figure 14) as
shown in the stored related log file available in Table A4 within Appendix B. The mean
planes extracted by the K-means algorithm displays similar values (i.e., 090/68; 139/72;
036/60; 275/74), but are randomly sorted and without any indication of predominant
clusters. The result of the first algorithm highlighted as the main former clusters display a
reasonably good correlation with the previous station, even if rotated by about 35◦ around
a vertical axis. For the stretching lineations, we preferred to apply the K-means algorithm
to extract the stretching lineations mean vector (116/05 trend/plunge notation), since the
occurrence of supplementary trend values, as already explained in the first case study
from Macduff.
At the third station along the beach, several useful outcrops are well exposed. The
275 available mylonitic foliations depict a main northward cluster followed by a secondary
southward one. The application of M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithm set preliminary with a
high number of cluster constraints, highlighted more than eight or nine clusters, with
the large number of coalescing data due to the occurrence of highly strained isoclinal
folds evolving into sheath folds. Setting the ‘Number of Clusters’ parameter to four, the
obtained mean vectors are: 101/69, 283/70, 064/67, 257/77 (strike/dip notation, azimuth
tolerance = 20%, inclination tolerance = 20%, Fisher confidence = 95%), which followed the
trend of the results of previous structural stations. In this case, we also used a K-means
approach for the stretching lineations (n = 56) mean vector extraction. The result is a
nearly subhorizontal mean lineation (099/04—trend/plunge notation) (Figure 15), as a
consequence of the occurrence of two quite dispersed clusters around E and W directions.

Figure 14. ‘Reef 2′ station: (a) equal-area azimuthal projection and statistical analysis of main foliations and stretching
lineation data and (b) field example of mylonitic foliation subparallel to fold axial surface in tonalites. The ASN log file is
provided in Appendix B (Table A4).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 20 of 32

Figure 15. ‘Beach’ station: (a) equal-area azimuthal projection and statistical analysis of main foliations and stretching
lineation data and (b) field example of W–E oriented mylonitic foliation developed in tonalites interlayered with paragneisses.
The ASN log file is provided in Appendix B (Table A5).

The fourth structural station, located close to the Malopasso locality (Figures 1 and 7),
consists of 39 mylonitic foliations and 8 stretching lineations. In this case, all the applied
mean extracting algorithms, for both main foliations and stretching lineations, converge.
Therefore, we selected the M.E.A.D. + Fisher algorithm to show two confidence cones
(Figure 16). The green confidence cone surrounds the pole to mean foliation (310/69—
strike/dip notation) with a Fisher angle of 5.28 degrees, while the yellow one is referred
to the stretching lineation mean vector (127/10—trend/plunge notation), with Fisher
angle of 9,29 degrees (see Table A6 in Appendix B). In both cases, we set the following
algorithm-control parameters: azimuth tolerance = 50%, inclination tolerance = 30%, Fisher
confidence = 95%.
In general, the orientations of all mesoscopic structures collected at the various lo-
calities are quite similar, with only slight differences. In particular, a good association
between foliations collected at the first station (Figure 13) and the fourth Malopasso sta-
tion (Figure 16) has been observed. These stations, which are the northernmost studied
localities within the PSZ, have steeply dipping NE-dipping foliations (ca. 70◦ ) with an
average NW–SE strike and subhorizontal NW–SE oriented stretching lineations. The other
structural stations show a mainly E-W striking foliation that dips either to the N or S
(ca. 75◦ ) and is associated with horizontal stretching lineations dispersed toward the E
and W.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 21 of 32

Figure 16. ‘Malopasso’ station: (a) equal-area azimuthal projection and statistical analysis of main foliations and stretching
lineation data and (b) field example of tight isoclinal folds and smaller sheath folds developed in calc-silicates and skarns.
The ASN log file is provided in Appendix B (Table A6).

3.2.2. Microstructural Data Analysis

Two thin sections have been selected for quantitative microstructural analysis in order
to create rose diagrams with ASN (see Ortolano et al. [4] for details of microstructure). These
rose diagrams depict the preferred orientations of minerals belonging to porphyroclastic
domains, where pre-kinematic clasts behave as rigid phases during subsimple shearing
plastic deformation. The samples, PAL11 and PAL12a (Figures 12, 17a and 18a), consist
of a mylonitic paragneiss from the ‘Malopasso’ station and a mylonitic skarn collected
from near the ‘Beach’ station, respectively. The thin section analysis was performed by
means of the Min-GSD routine within the Micro-Fabric Analyzer tool [47] which, operating
already within the ArcGIS® platform, is suitable as an ‘ASN-friendly’ input feature. The
2D orientation data, obtained via Min-GSD through a stepwise controlled overlaying
procedure of X-Ray and Grain-boundary maps of thin sections, permitted storage of
microstructural information of minerals in shapefile format [47] (Figures 17a and 18a), and
is provided in Table S3 and Table S4 within Supplementary Materials. Specifically, the
minimum bounding geometry approach was applied to about 800 clasts per thin section,
with the azimuthal values of the preferred orientation of porphyroclasts ranging from 0 to
180 degrees with respect to the normal axis to the main foliation of the sample (Figure 17b).
These values can be computed by the ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool while the feature type input
parameter can be filled with the mineral name field. Six and twelve rose diagrams have
been created, respectively, for PAL11 and PAL12a samples. In both samples, we constructed
standard rose diagrams (Figure 17c,e,g, and Figure 18b,d,f,h,j,l), which display directional
data and the frequency of minerals, and also weighted rose diagrams (Figure 17b,f,h, and
Figure 18c,e,g,i,k,m), which were useful to assign greater or smaller importance to each
grain orientation as a function of a specific weighting factor (e.g., their area in mm2 ). In
both cases, we selected the ‘Mirrored behaviour’ option as the azimuthal values only range
from 0 to 180 degrees.
For the mylonitic paragneiss (PAL11), a total of 30 amphibole porphyroclasts, 100 K-
feldspars and 604 plagioclases were analysed.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 22 of 32

The unweighted rose diagram for the amphiboles, which have equivalent spherical
diameters [48] (ESD) ranging from 0.25 mm to 0.83 mm, highlights a maximum alignment
(i.e., 90◦ –270◦ ) parallel to the mylonitic foliation, which is oriented in a WNW–ESE direc-
tion (Figure 17c). In addition, a weaker alignment with an orientation that deviates by
~20 degrees from the main foliation, can also be recognized. The same results are obtained
from the weighted rose diagram (Figure 17d), which does however assign less statistical
impact to grains showing an orientation that deviates from the main foliation, due to their
small cumulative area.
The unweighted rose diagram for the K-feldspars (0.25 mm < ESD < 3.67 mm) high-
lights a maximum alignment (i.e., 80◦ –260◦ ) that deviates by ~10 degrees from the main
foliation (Figure 17e), although several families with orientations that vary about the
120◦ –300◦ and 40◦ –220◦ directions also occur. However, the existence of these families is
minimized by the weighted rose diagram (Figure 17f), which shows a clear orientation
at 80◦ –260◦ , preserved especially by the largest porphyroclasts, where the simple shear
component is more pronounced (see Ortolano et al. [4] for details).
Similar to the amphiboles, the unweighted rose diagram for the plagioclases (0.25 mm
< ESD < 2.45 mm) highlights a prevalent orientation (i.e., 90◦ –270◦ ) along the mylonitic
foliation (Figure 17g). However, several families show a dispersal in orientation towards
N-S and E-W directions with respect to the main foliation, probably linked to the activation
of S-C’ planes. This dispersion is highlighted by the weighted rose diagram (Figure 17h),
in which the most weighted porphyroclasts show a clear trend along the N-S direction (i.e.,
120◦ –300◦ ).
The mylonitic skarn (PAL12a) allowed us to process a total of 144 calcite clasts, 102 calc-
silicate minerals, 231 clinopyroxenes, 149 K-feldspars, 63 plagioclases and 186 scapolite
porphyroclasts, with the calculated orientations illustrated in Figure 18.
The unweighted rose diagram for the calcite porphyroclasts (0.18 mm < ESD <
0.50 mm) highlights high dispersion in the orientation data with respect to the mylonitic
foliation oriented on average E-W (Figure 18b). Most weighted grains do however show a
dominant orientation about E-W (i.e., 80◦ –260◦ ) as also obtained with the weighted rose
diagram (Figure 18c).
The unweighted rose diagram for the calc-silicates (0.18 mm < ESD < 0.79 mm) high-
lights a lesser dispersion in the orientation data when compared with calcite porphyroclasts,
with a high number of grains aligned parallel to the mylonitic foliation (Figure 18d). Nev-
ertheless, by considering the cumulative area of porphyroclasts with the same orientation,
as highlighted by the weighted rose diagram (Figure 18e), other families oriented about
NE–SW (i.e., 30◦ –210◦ ) and WNW-ESE (i.e., 110◦ –290◦ ) orientations can also be recognized.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 23 of 32

Figure 17. Application of ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool to PAL11 microstructural data. (a) Porphyroclast grain
boundary detection map obtained via Min-GSD routine [4]; (b) scheme of the minimum bounding
geometry data extraction for each single clast, where α represents the angle between the normal to
the main foliation in thin section with the major axis of the bounding box; (c,e,g) unweighted rose
diagrams; (d,f,h) weighted rose diagrams based on grains cumulative area (in mm2 ).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 24 of 32

Figure 18. Application of ‘Rose Diagrams’ tool to PAL12a microstructural data. (a) Porphyroclast grain boundary detection
map obtained via Min-GSD routine [4]; (b,d,f,h,j,l) unweighted rose diagrams; (c,e,g,i,k,m) weighted rose diagrams based
on grains cumulative area (in mm2 ).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 25 of 32

Similar to the previous mineral phases, the unweighted rose diagram for the clinopy-
roxenes (0.18 mm < ESD < 1.21 mm) highlights high dispersion in the orientation data
with respect to the mylonitic foliation (Figure 18f). Such dispersion is also shown by
the weighted rose diagram (Figure 18g), with a dominant ESE–WNW orientation (i.e.,
120◦ –300◦ ) observed.
The unweighted rose diagram for the K-feldspars (0.18 mm < ESD < 1.35 mm) high-
lights a maximum alignment (i.e., 90◦ –270◦ ) parallel to the main foliations (Figure 18e).
Such alignment is also preserved in the weighted rose diagram (Figure 18i), where fewer
families show a ~N-S orientation (i.e., 20◦ –200◦ ).
Similar to the calcite porphyroclasts, the unweighted rose diagram for the plagioclases
(0.18 mm < ESD < 1.03 mm) highlights high dispersion in the orientation data (Figure 18j),
with a dominant trend about the E-W (i.e., 80◦ –260◦ ) and N-S (i.e., 20◦ –200◦ ) directions.
This dispersion is made even more evident by the weighted rose diagram (Figure 18k).
The unweighted rose diagram for the scapolites (0.18 mm < ESD < 7.26 mm) highlights
two dominant alignments oriented about the E–W (i.e., 90◦ –270◦ ) and ENE–WSW (i.e.,
50◦ –230◦ ) directions (Figure 18l), which are further emphasized in the weighted rose
diagram (Figure 18m).
Unlike the mylonite paragneiss (PAL11), a greater dispersion in the orientation of the
porphyroclasts is observed in the mylonitic skarn (PAL12a) due to the higher contrast in
behaviour between weakening (i.e., calcite) and hardening (i.e., porphyroclasts) layers.
This leads to a major passive rotation of the PAL12a porphyroclasts during the mylonitic
flow due to the high rheology contrast with respect to the calcite weak layers. Differently,
PAL11 porphyroclasts, which are surrounded by quartz-rich weak layers (i.e., with a
lower rheology contrast with respect to PAL12a), facilitate wing formation, producing
greater resistance to the mylonitic flow and, in turn, a clearer evidence of subsimple shear
kinematic indicator formation.

4. Discussions
ArcStereoNet is a new Python-toolbox that merges the main ArcGIS® features with
the semi-automatic creation of stereoplots, and is compatible with the latest versions of
ArcMap® (versions 10.3+).
The reason we chose to use the ESRI ArcGIS® platform, rather than other GIS software,
arises from the fact that, starting from the 10.1 version, it is possible to create various
personalised Python toolboxes (i.e., that can use several open access Python libraries).
These can be linked together with other existing tools (i.e., Model Builder [2,28,29,47])
within a very user-friendly ArcGIS® -like GUI. Furthermore, since the Python version
attached to ArcGIS® differs according to ArcGIS® version itself, then the ASN code is able
to recognize it and consequently adapt the automatic download and installation routine
of the suitable libraries. This extends its compatibility from ArcGIS® 10.3 to the latest
distribution (see Supplementary Material—S5).
Even though the use of the open-source library developed by Kington [30] (i.e.,
mplstereonet) permits the use of most of the ASN applications directly from a Python
console, the development of the ASN Python-toolbox opens the possibility of creating
lower-hemisphere azimuthal projections and rose diagrams within an ArcGIS® supported
GUI for non-Python users. Moreover, ASN allows the user to easily compare several types
of analytical statistical methods, including, for the first time, a totally new clustering and
mean vector extracting algorithm (Mean Extractor from Azimuthal Data). The M.E.A.D.
clustering process takes as input the orientation data, expressed as a list of azimuth-dip
couples (i.e., strike-dip for planar features or trend-plunge for linear features), and groups
it into a user-defined number of families (i.e., the ‘Number of Clusters’ parameter). The
degree of tolerance is driven by two user-controlled percentage values, allowing, in turn, a
more incisive analytical choice (see Figure 4). The tool also helps the user in setting the
algorithm-control parameters, by providing the possibility to track the behaviour of the
M.E.A.D. clustering process (Figures 3d and 5).
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 26 of 32

ASN joins the classical GIS capabilities of correlating each single projected data point
with the corresponding geographical/locality position, thereby merging or subdividing
groups of structural stations with a simple procedure. In this view, the ‘Graph to Hyperlink’
tool is used to connect the realised plots with the geographic position of the plotted data,
via hyperlink.
Finally, the rose diagrams constructions are applicable, not only for analysis of 2D
fault/joint planes orientations, but also for the 2D orientation of microstructural fabric
parameters, such as those deriving from grain shape analysis of grain boundary maps in
thin sections (e.g., [47]). ASN, however, is potentially capable of working with any type of
2D or 3D oriented data.
The abovementioned specifications drive the ASN-user towards a greater awareness
of the average data extrapolation through quick and effective comparisons, by linking
the geo-databases manipulation with automatization of various spatially distributed data
specific to the GIS environment. In such a way, the user can at any time visualise exactly,
within their GIS project, the plotted data together with the corresponding geographi-
cal/locality position.
ArcStereoNet follows on the heels of its predecessors developed on the ESRI plat-
form, of which the pioneer is certainly the first tool developed in Avenue [49] for ArcView
3.x by Knox-Robinson and Gardoll [17]. With the development of ArcMap® , other tool-
bars and add-ins were designed, such as the Export Toolbox [24], written in VBA, that
provided methods to export oriented data managed in ArcMap® 8.2 to 3D geoscientific
modelling tools (i.e., Editeur Géologique, developed by BRGM, and GOCAD® [50]) and
also integrated a spatial averaging routine within ArcMap® itself. These tools are obvi-
ously out-dated and no longer compatible with recent versions of ArcGIS® which in the
meantime has evolved towards more open data sharing modes and scripting methods.
The most recent tool working within ArcGIS® environment is OATools [25], an add-in
for ArcMap® 10.2 and 10.3 versions, written in Visual Basic.NET (VB.NET). This takes
advantage of GIS functionalities to carry out the spatial analysis of structural data. Its main
features include azimuthal projection of oriented data, extraction of mean vector and fold
axes, creation of density distribution diagrams, creation of rose histograms, and mapping
of spatial averages.
ArcStereoNet is, therefore, the first entirely Python-coded ArcGIS® tool for the analysis
of 3D and 2D oriented datasets. As a result, it smoothly blends with other built-in ArcGIS®
toolboxes and its functionalities could be considerably expanded or enhanced thanks to
the huge amount of available open access Python libraries. Python-toolboxes are in fact
the ESRI suggested approach for creating Python-based tools since ArcGIS® 10.1 version.
Moreover, ASN brings in the possibility of choosing between several methods to carry out
clustering analysis (for the first time applicable also to rose diagrams) and mean vector
extraction, as well as various density distribution functions, thereby providing the user a
wide range of statistical analysis techniques to apply to oriented data.

5. Conclusions
ArcStereoNet is the first ArcGIS® Python-toolbox for azimuthal projections useful for
2D and 3D oriented data analysis. It encourages greater user awareness via a stepwise
guided control of the different analytical techniques used for 3D and 2D data projections in
a GIS environment.
The main features introduced by this new toolbox are:
1. A totally new clustering and mean-vector extracting algorithm used to obtain size-
decreasing ordered clusters (i.e., M.E.A.D), and which enables a greater background
noise control through tolerance parameters.
2. The capability of analysing both cluster and girdle-like distribution patterns with
several algorithms.
3. The capability of contemporaneously running multiple data analysis algorithms to
extract statistical parameters.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 27 of 32

4. The capability of storing applied algorithm results on automatically compiled log files.
5. The capability of testing several parameter settings at a time via the use of temporary
images that do not waste disk memory.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2220-996

4/10/2/50/s1, ArcStereoNet toolbox (S1), Table S2: Palmi meso-structural database, Table S3: PAL11
micro-strucutral database, Table S4: PAL12a micro-strucutral database, User Guide (S5).
Author Contributions: Conceptualization: Gaetano Ortolano, Alberto D’Agostino, Methodology: Al-
berto D’Agostino, Gaetano Ortolano, Michele Zucali, Roberto Visalli, Software: Alberto D’Agostino,
Gaetano Ortolano, Michele Zucali, Roberto Visalli Validation: G. Ian Alsop, Eugenio Fazio, Michele
Zucali, Formal Analysis: Gaetano Ortolano, G. Ian Alsop, Michele Zucali, Data resources: Gaetano
Ortolano, Rosolino Cirrincione, Mario Pagano, Eugenio Fazio, Roberto Visalli; Data Curation: Alberto
D’Agostino, Roberto Visalli, Mario Pagano, Eugenio Fazio, G. Ian Alsop, Writing-Original Draft
Preparation: Gaetano Ortolano, Alberto D’Agostino, Roberto Visalli, Eugenio Fazio, Writing-Review
& Editing: Michele Zucali, G. Ian Alsop, Rosolino Cirrincione, Figure editing: Alberto D’Agostino,
Gaetano Ortolano, Mario Pagano, Roberto Visalli, Supervision: Gaetano Ortolano, Rosolino Cir-
rincione; Project Administration: Gaetano Ortolano, Rosolino Cirrincione; Funding Acquisition:
Gaetano Ortolano, Rosolino Cirrincione. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by University of Catania (PIAno di inCEntivi per la RIcerca di
Ateneo 2020/2022—Pia.Ce.Ri), Grant Number: 22722132153, within the project: ”Combined geomatic
and petromatic applications: The new frontier of geoscience investigations from field- to micro-
scale—(GeoPetroMat)”.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data and the software presented in this study are available online
in Supplementary Materials.
Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful sugges-
tions that helped to improve the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
Within this section, two variants of the Macduff dataset are provided, with the for-
mer (Table A1) classifying all data types as generic ‘Fold limb’ and the latter (Table A2)
differencing data types between ‘West limb of Anticlines’ and ‘East limb of Anticlines’.

Table A1. Macduff dataset without any data differentiation evidenced by the field investigator (i.e.,
all data is labelled as generic ‘Fold limb’).

ID Azimuth Dip_Angle Method Type

0 206 65 RHR Fold limb
1 212 25 RHR Fold limb
2 217 40 RHR Fold limb
3 197 24 RHR Fold limb
4 192 20 RHR Fold limb
5 213 40 RHR Fold limb
6 206 74 RHR Fold limb
7 205 68 RHR Fold limb
8 190 35 RHR Fold limb
9 212 35 RHR Fold limb
10 203 85 RHR Fold limb
11 205 52 RHR Fold limb
12 210 55 RHR Fold limb
13 204 48 RHR Fold limb
14 206 70 RHR Fold limb
15 212 83 RHR Fold limb
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 28 of 32

Table A1. Cont.

ID Azimuth Dip_Angle Method Type

16 215 84 RHR Fold limb
17 210 77 RHR Fold limb
18 214 81 RHR Fold limb
19 207 80 RHR Fold limb
20 205 81 RHR Fold limb
21 207 86 RHR Fold limb
22 206 85 RHR Fold limb
23 214 63 RHR Fold limb
24 30 65 RHR Fold limb
25 45 70 RHR Fold limb
26 27 75 RHR Fold limb
27 33 83 RHR Fold limb
28 33 74 RHR Fold limb
29 40 70 RHR Fold limb
30 15 65 RHR Fold limb
31 34 76 RHR Fold limb
32 32 75 RHR Fold limb
33 32 88 RHR Fold limb
34 34 80 RHR Fold limb
35 35 80 RHR Fold limb
36 32 70 RHR Fold limb
37 15 85 RHR Fold limb
38 24 72 RHR Fold limb
39 25 70 RHR Fold limb

Table A2. Macduff dataset with data differentiation evidenced by the field investigator (i.e., data is
split into ‘West limb of Anticlines’ and ‘East limb of Anticlines’).

ID Azimuth Dip_Angle Method Type

0 206 65 RHR West limb of Anticlines
1 212 25 RHR West limb of Anticlines
2 217 40 RHR West limb of Anticlines
3 197 24 RHR West limb of Anticlines
4 192 20 RHR West limb of Anticlines
5 213 40 RHR West limb of Anticlines
6 206 74 RHR West limb of Anticlines
7 205 68 RHR West limb of Anticlines
8 190 35 RHR West limb of Anticlines
9 212 35 RHR West limb of Anticlines
10 203 85 RHR West limb of Anticlines
11 205 52 RHR West limb of Anticlines
12 210 55 RHR West limb of Anticlines
13 204 48 RHR West limb of Anticlines
14 206 70 RHR West limb of Anticlines
15 212 83 RHR East limb of Anticlines
16 215 84 RHR East limb of Anticlines
17 210 77 RHR East limb of Anticlines
18 214 81 RHR East limb of Anticlines
19 207 80 RHR East limb of Anticlines
20 205 81 RHR East limb of Anticlines
21 207 86 RHR East limb of Anticlines
22 206 85 RHR East limb of Anticlines
23 214 63 RHR East limb of Anticlines
24 30 65 RHR East limb of Anticlines
25 45 70 RHR East limb of Anticlines
26 27 75 RHR East limb of Anticlines
27 33 83 RHR East limb of Anticlines
28 33 74 RHR East limb of Anticlines
29 40 70 RHR East limb of Anticlines
30 15 65 RHR East limb of Anticlines
31 34 76 RHR East limb of Anticlines
32 32 75 RHR East limb of Anticlines
33 32 88 RHR East limb of Anticlines
34 34 80 RHR East limb of Anticlines
35 35 80 RHR East limb of Anticlines
36 32 70 RHR East limb of Anticlines
37 15 85 RHR East limb of Anticlines
38 24 72 RHR East limb of Anticlines
39 25 70 RHR East limb of Anticlines
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 29 of 32

Appendix B
Within this section, four log files, automatically compiled by ASN, are provided. They
store results and statistical information of the algorithms applied on Palmi mesostruc-
tural data.

Table A3. ‘Reef 1′ station log file. The original .txt file has been converted to table format.

REEF 1

Main Foliation = 112

Stretching Lineation = 10

CONTOUR INFO
Applied on -> Main Foliation
Method -> Kamb (linear smoothing)
St.Dev. -> 1.5

STATISTICS
Main Foliation [K-means mean(s)] -> 311/74

Main Foliation [M.E.A.D. + Fisher mean(s)] -> 316/69

Main Foliation [Fisher Stats]:
- R value (length of the mean vector) -> 0.924
- Fisher angle (confidence radius) -> 4.62 deg
- K value (dispersion factor) -> 13.02

Stretching Lineation [Bingham best fit plane] -> 320/66

Note that mean values are expressed as follows:

- strike/dip (planar features)
- trend/plunge (linear features)

Log file automatically compiled by ArcStereoNet

Table A4. ‘Reef 2′ station log file. The original .txt file has been converted to table format.

REEF 2

Main Foliation = 34
Stretching Lineation = 19

CONTOUR INFO
Applied on -> Main Foliation
Kamb (linear
Method ->
smoothing)
St.Dev. -> 1.5

STATISTICS
Main Foliation [K-means mean(s)] -> 036/60 090/68 139/72 275/74

Main Foliation [M.E.A.D. + Fisher mean(s)]

098/67 275/74 036/61 144/72
->
Main Foliation [Fisher Stats]:
- R value (length of the mean vector) -> 0.941 0.966 0.963 0.996
- Fisher angle (confidence radius) -> 10.30 deg 9.06 deg 16.93 deg 10.04 deg
- K value (dispersion factor) -> 15.87 26.36 21.38 151.70

Stretching Lineation [K-means mean(s)] -> 116/05

Note that mean values are expressed as

follows:
- strike/dip (planar features)
- trend/plunge (linear features)

Log file automatically compiled by

ArcStereoNet
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 30 of 32

Table A5. ‘Beach’ station log file. The original .txt file has been converted to table format.

BEACH

Main Foliation = 275

Stretching Lineation = 56

CONTOUR INFO
Applied on -> Main Foliation
Kamb (linear
Method ->
smoothing)
St.Dev. -> 1.5

STATISTICS
Main Foliation [M.E.A.D. + Fisher mean(s)] -> 101/69 283/70 064/67 257/77
Main Foliation [Fisher Stats]:
- R value (length of the mean vector) -> 0.967 0.969 0.969 0.994
- Fisher angle (confidence radius) -> 2.22 deg 4.09 deg 4.52 deg 3.22 deg
- K value (dispersion factor) -> 30.16 31.55 31.55 153.40

Stretching Lineation [K-means mean(s)] -> 099/04

Note that mean values are expressed as follows:

- strike/dip (planar features)
- trend/plunge (linear features)

Log file automatically compiled by

ArcStereoNet

Table A6. ‘Malopasso’ station log file. The original .txt file has been converted to table format.

MALOPASSO

Main Foliation = 39
Stretching Lineation = 8

CONTOUR INFO
Applied on -> Main Foliation
Method -> Kamb (linear smoothing)
St.Dev. -> 1.5

STATISTICS
Main Foliation [M.E.A.D. + Fisher mean(s)] -> 310/69
Main Foliation [Fisher Stats]:
- R value (length of the mean vector) -> 0.957
- Fisher angle (confidence radius) -> 5.28 deg
- K value (dispersion factor) -> 22.69

Stretching Lineation [M.E.A.D. + Fisher mean(s)] -> 127/10

Stretching Lineation [Fisher Stats]:
- R value (length of the mean vector) -> 0.980
- Fisher angle (confidence radius) -> 9.29 deg
- K value (dispersion factor) -> 43.19

Note that mean values are expressed as follows:

- strike/dip (planar features)
- trend/plunge (linear features)

Log file automatically compiled by ArcStereoNet

ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 31 of 32

References
1. Ortolano, G.; Visalli, R.; Cirrincione, R.; Rebay, G. PT-path reconstruction via unraveling of peculiar zoning pattern in atoll shaped
garnets via image assisted analysis: An example from the Santa Lucia del Mela garnet micaschists (northeastern Sicily-Italy).
Period. Miner. 2014, 83, 257–297. [CrossRef]
2. Ortolano, G.; Zappalà, L.; Mazzoleni, P. X-Ray Map Analyser: A new ArcGIS® based tool for the quantitative statistical data
handling of X-ray maps (Geo- and material-science applications). Comput. Geosci. 2014, 72, 49–64. [CrossRef]
3. Ortolano, G.; Cirrincione, R.; Pezzino, A.; Tripodi, V.; Zappala, L. Petro-structural geology of the Eastern Aspromonte Massif
crystalline basement (southern Italy-Calabria): An example of interoperable geo-data management from thin section—To field
scale. J. Maps 2015, 11, 181–200. [CrossRef]
4. Ortolano, G.; Fazio, E.; Visalli, R.; Alsop, G.I.; Pagano, M.; Cirrincione, R. Quantitative microstructural analysis of mylonites
formed during Alpine tectonics in the western Mediterranean realm. J. Struct. Geol. 2020, 131, 103956. [CrossRef]
5. Ortolano, G.; Visalli, R.; Fazio, E.; Fiannacca, P.; Godard, G.; Pezzino, A.; Punturo, R.; Sacco, V.; Cirrincione, R. Tectono-
metamorphic evolution of the Calabria continental lower crust: The case of the Sila Piccola Massif. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2020, 109,
1295–1319. [CrossRef]
6. Belfiore, C.M.; Fichera, G.V.; Ortolano, G.; Pezzino, A.; Visalli, R.; Zappalà, L. Image processing of the pozzolanic reactions in
Roman mortars via X-Ray Map Analyser. Microchem. J. 2016, 125, 242–253. [CrossRef]
7. Fazio, E.; Ortolano, G.; Visalli, R.; Alsop, I.; Cirrincione, R.; Pezzino, A. Strain localization and sheath fold development during
progressive deformation in a ductile shear zone: A case study of macro-to micro-scale structures from the Aspromonte Massif,
Calabria. Ital. J. Geosci. 2018, 137, 208–218. [CrossRef]
8. Fazio, E.; Ortolano, G.; Visalli, R.; Cirrincione, R.; Kern, H.; Mengel, K.; Pezzino, A.; Punturo, R. Strain rates of the syn-tectonic
Symvolon pluton (Southern Rhodope Core Complex, Greece): An integrated approach combining quartz paleopiezometry, flow
laws and PT pseudosections. Ital. J. Geosci. 2018, 137, 219–237. [CrossRef]
9. Fazio, E.; Punturo, R.; Cirrincione, R.; Kern, H.; Pezzino, A.; Wenk, H.-R.; Goswami, S.; Mamtani, M.A. Quartz preferred
orientation in naturally deformed mylonitic rocks (Montalto shear zone–Italy): A comparison of results by different techniques,
their advantages and limitations. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2017, 106, 2259–2278. [CrossRef]
10. Fazio, E.; Punturo, R.; Cirrincione, R. Quartz c-axis texture mapping of mylonitic metapelite with rod structures (Calabria,
southern Italy): Clues for hidden shear flow direction. J. Geol. Soc. India 2010, 75, 171–182. [CrossRef]
11. Turner, F.J.; Weiss, L.E. Structural Analysis of Metamorphic Tectonites; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1963; ISBN 978-0-07-065574-4.
12. Phillips, F.C. The Use of Stereographic Projection in Structural Geology, 3rd ed.; Edward Arnold: London, UK, 1971; ISBN 978-0-7131-
2342-5.
13. Park, R.G. Foundations of Structural Geology, 3rd ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2013; ISBN 978-1-136-78435-4.
14. Snyder, J.P. Map Projections—A Working Manual; US Geological Survey Professional Paper 1395; US Government Printing Office:
Washington, DC, USA, 1987; ISBN 978-1-78266-222-8.
15. Grafarend, E.W.; You, R.-J.; Syffus, R. Map Projections; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; ISBN 978-3-642-36493-8.
16. Hobbs, B.E.; Means, W.D.; Williams, P.F. An Outline of Structural Geology; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1985; ISBN 978-0-471-40157-5.
17. Knox-Robinson, C.M.; Gardoll, S.J. GIS-stereoplot: An interactive stereonet plotting module for ArcView 3.0 geographic
information system. Comput. Geosci. 1998, 24, 243–250. [CrossRef]
18. Allmendinger, R. Stereonet 11 | Rick Allmendinger’s Stuff. Available online: http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/faculty/
RWA/programs/stereonet.html (accessed on 25 November 2020).
19. Vollmer, F.W. C program for automatic contouring of spherical orientation data using a modified Kamb method. Comput. Geosci.
1995, 21, 31–49. [CrossRef]
20. Vollmer, F.W. An application of eigenvalue methods to structural domain analysis. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 1990, 102, 786–791.
[CrossRef]
21. Vollmer, F.W. Orient 3: A new integrated software program for orientation data analysis, kinematic analysis, spherical projections,
and Schmidt plots. In Proceedings of the Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA, 25–28
October 2015; Volume 47, p. 49.
22. Alberti, M.; Laloux, M.; Zanieri, M. Tools for structural geology analysis in QGIS. Rendiconti. Online Soc. Geol. Ital. 2016, 39, 55–59.
[CrossRef]
23. Thiele, S.T.; Grose, L.; Samsu, A.; Micklethwaite, S.; Vollgger, S.A.; Cruden, A.R. Rapid, semi-automatic fracture and contact
mapping for point clouds, images and geophysical data. Solid Earth 2017, 8, 1241–1253. [CrossRef]
24. Maxelon, M. Some Tools for Three-Dimensional Modelling in Structural Geology and Tectonics; ETH: Zurich, Switzerland, 2004.
25. Kociánová, L.; Melichar, R. OATools: An ArcMap add-in for the orientation analysis of geological structures. Comput. Geosci.
2016, 87, 67–75. [CrossRef]
26. Fazio, E.; Ortolano, G.; Cirrincione, R. Eye-type folds at the Palmi shear zone (Calabria, Italy). Int. J. Earth Sci. 2017, 106,
2039–2040. [CrossRef]
27. Li, Y.; Onasch, C.M.; Guo, Y. GIS-based detection of grain boundaries. J. Struct. Geol. 2008, 30, 431–443. [CrossRef]
28. Ortolano, G.; Visalli, R.; Godard, G.; Cirrincione, R. Quantitative X-ray Map Analyser (Q-XRMA): A new GIS-based statistical
approach to Mineral Image Analysis. Comput. Geosci. 2018, 115, 56–65. [CrossRef]
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 50 32 of 32

29. Fiannacca, P.; Ortolano, G.; Pagano, M.; Visalli, R.; Cirrincione, R.; Zappalà, L. IG-Mapper: A new ArcGIS®toolbox for the
geostatistics-based automated geochemical mapping of igneous rocks. Chem. Geol. 2017, 470, 75–92. [CrossRef]
30. Kington, J. Joferkington/Mplstereonet. Available online: https://github.com/joferkington/mplstereonet (accessed on 25
November 2020).
31. Hunter, J.D. Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2007, 9, 90–95. [CrossRef]
32. Oliphant, T.E. A Guide to NumPy, 2nd ed.; CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform: North Charleston, SC, USA, 2015;
ISBN 1-5173-0007-X.
33. Kamb, W.B. Ice petrofabric observations from Blue Glacier, Washington, in relation to theory and experiment. J. Geophys. Res.
1959, 64, 1891–1909. [CrossRef]
34. Fisher, N.I.; Lewis, T.; Embleton, B.J.J. Statistical Analysis of Spherical Data; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1993;
ISBN 978-0-521-45699-9.
35. Kington, J. Mplstereonet Package—Mplstereonet 0.6-dev Documentation. Available online: https://mplstereonet.readthedocs.io/
en/latest/mplstereonet.html (accessed on 25 November 2020).
36. MacQueen, J. Some Methods for Classification and Analysis of Multivariate Observations. In Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley
Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Oakland, CA, USA, 21 June–18 July 1967; University of California Press:
Berkeley, CA, USA, 1967; Volume 1, pp. 281–297.
37. Bingham, C. An Antipodally Symmetric Distribution on the Sphere. Ann. Stat. 1974, 2, 1201–1225. [CrossRef]
38. Trewin, N.H. Macduff, Dalradian Turbidite Fan and Glacial Deposits. In Excursion Guide to the Geology of the Aberdeen Area;
Scottish Academic Press: Edinburgh, UK, 1987; pp. 79–88.
39. Chew, D.M.; Strachan, R.A. The Laurentian Caledonides of Scotland and Ireland. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 2014, 390, 45–91.
[CrossRef]
40. Strachan, R.A. The Grampian Orogeny: Mid-Ordovician Arc–Continent Collision along the Laurentian Margin of Iapetus. In
Geological History of Britain and Ireland; Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 91–109. ISBN 978-1-118-27406-4.
41. Hudson, N.F.C.; Johnson, T.E. Macduff to Whitehills—Buchan type regional metamorphic zones. In Excursion guide to the Geology
of the Aberdeen Area; Scottish Academic Press: Edinburgh, UK, 1987; pp. 89–98.
42. Prosser, G.; Caggianelli, A.; Rottura, A. Strain localisation driven by marble layers: The Palmi shear zone (Calabria-Peloritani
terrane, Southern Italy). GeoActa 2003, 2, 155–166.
43. Cirrincione, R.; Fazio, E.; Fiannacca, P.; Ortolano, G.; Pezzino, A.; Punturo, R. The Calabria-Peloritani Orogen, a composite terrane
in Central Mediterranean; Its overall architecture and geodynamic significance for a pre-Alpine scenario around the Tethyan
basin. Period. Miner. 2015, 84, 701–749. [CrossRef]
44. Ortolano, G.; Cirrincione, R.; Pezzino, A.; Puliatti, G. Geo-Petro-Structural study of the Palmi shear zone: Kinematic and
rheological implications. Rend. Online Soc. Geol. Ital. 2013, 29, 126–129.
45. Ortolano, G.; Cirrincione, R.; Pezzino, A. P-T evolution of Alpine metamorphism in the southern Aspromonte Massif (Calabria-
Italy). Schweiz. Mineral. Petrogr. Mitt. 2005, 85, 31–56.
46. Angì, G.; Cirrincione, R.; Fazio, E.; Fiannacca, P.; Ortolano, G.; Pezzino, A. Metamorphic evolution of preserved Hercynian crustal
section in the Serre Massif (Calabria-Peloritani Orogen, southern Italy). Lithos 2010, 115, 237–262. [CrossRef]
47. Visalli, R.; Ortolano, G.; Godard, G.; Cirrincione, R. Micro-Fabric Analyzer (MFA): A new semiautomated ArcGIS-based edge
detector for quantitative microstructural analysis of rock thin-sections. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 51. [CrossRef]
48. Jennings, B.R.; Parslow, K. Particle size measurement: The equivalent spherical diameter. Proc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 1988, 419,
137–149. [CrossRef]
49. Razavi, A.H.; Warwick, V. ArcView GIS/Avenue Programmer’s Reference: Class Hierarchy Quick Reference and 100+ Scripts, 3rd ed.;
OnWord Press: Albany, NY, USA, 2000; ISBN 978-1-56690-170-3.
50. Mallet, J.L. GOCAD: A Computer Aided Design Program for Geological Applications. In Three-Dimensional Modeling with Geoscientific
Information Systems; Turner, A.K., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1992; pp. 123–141, ISBN 978-94-010-5128-6.