Skip to content
man bot
Compare

Professionals · code 2114

Geologists and geophysicists

AI can crunch the seismic data. Reading the rock on a hillside is still fieldwork.

Mapping the Earth's magnetic field and measuring the seas and sky are where AI could take a fair chunk. Nine tasks are mostly out of its reach, and finding building materials in the ground it barely touches.

What they actually do (and what else they get called)

Geologists and geophysicists conduct research; improve or develop concepts, theories and operational methods; or apply scientific knowledge relating to geology and geophysics in such fields as oil, gas and mineral exploration and extraction, water conservation, civil engineering, telecommunications and navigation, and assessment and mitigation of the effects of development and waste disposal projects on the environment. Tasks include - (a) conducting research and improving or developing concepts, theories and operational methods related to geology and geophysics; (b) studying composition and structure of the Earth’s crust, examining rocks, minerals, fossils and other materials to determine processes affecting the development of the Earth, trace evolution of past life, establish the nature and chronology of geological formations and assess their commercial applications; (c) interpreting research data and preparing geological reports, maps, charts and diagrams, reports and papers; (d) applying geological knowledge to problems encountered in civil engineering projects such as the construction of dams, bridges, tunnels, and large buildings, and land reclamation projects; (e) using various remote sensing programmes to investigate and measure seismic, gravitational, electrical, thermal and magnetic forces affecting the Earth; (f) estimating weight, size and mass of the Earth and composition and structure of its interior, and studying the nature, activity and predictability of volcanoes, glaciers and earthquakes; (g) charting the Earth’s magnetic field and applying this and other collected data for broadcasting, navigation and other purposes; (h) studying and measuring physical properties of seas and the atmosphere and their interrelationship, such as the exchange of thermal energy; (i) locating and determining the nature and extent of oil, gas and mineral deposits using seismological, gravimetric, magnetic, electrical or radiometric methods; (j) identifying deposits of construction materials and determining their characteristics and suitability for use as concrete aggregates, road fill or for other applications; (k) researching the movement, distribution and physical properties of ground and surface waters; (l) advising in areas such as waste management, route and site selection and the restoration of contaminated sites. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Geological oceanographer - Geologist - Geophysical oceanographer - Geophysicist - Geoscientist

  • mineralogist
  • geologist
  • geophysicist

Job titles from the EU's ESCO list. Search for any of them on the jobs page and you'll end up here.

64 / 100

Mostly holds up against AI

AI can take a few chores off your plate, but most of the day is still yours.

Not the odds you keep your job. It's how much of the everyday work still needs a person, out of 100.

← Robot's turf Human's turf →

The ILO's official verdict: Minimal Exposure

288 of 427 for holding up against AI

Why this score?

The ILO rated each of this job's 12 tasks for how much of it AI could do. They average 36.3 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 36.3 = 63.7.

That's the whole sum. No black box, no secret sauce: you can check it against the ILO's study. ILO group “Minimal Exposure”: A few tasks are affected, but the heart of the job isn't.

This job rates 44.8 out of 100 for how hands-on it is. The score above only looks at AI tools, not robots, but for work this far from the physical that matters less.

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Man v Bot · compare

Who holds up better?

Geologists and geophysicists 64

v

Go on, try your partner's job. Or your sibling's. We won't tell.

Man v Bot

Where the bot helps, and where the human wins

Bot

What AI takes

The routine stuff. You may not miss it.

  • Analysing seismic and remote sensing data.
  • Maps, charts and reports.
  • Modelling underground structures.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

  • Fieldwork and examining rocks.
  • Interpreting ambiguous data.
  • Advising on risk for projects.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

  • Geothermal and carbon storage.
  • Critical minerals exploration.
  • Natural hazard and climate work.

Written by a human, from the ILO's task ratings below. Yes, we see the irony. Read it as one person's take.

Meet your two rivals

They're not the same machine. AI software can only reach the parts of a job done on a screen or in words. A chatbot can't climb a ladder. A robot might, one day, if it doesn't fall off.

The AI

Lives in a screen. Never had to fix a boiler.

Threat level: Low

33 could do without you

It could take over very little of the work on its own. It could help with 72 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Some

45 how hands-on

A fair part of this job is hands-on, so robots would be needed for that part, not just software.

So could a robot do the physical part?

Less than half of this job is hands-on. Robots still matter, but for a smaller part of the work, so we don't sort it any further.

Robots hate fiddly work in awkward spaces. On that measure, this job scores 22 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

45 How
hands-on
22 How fiddly
and cramped

Kind of hands-on work Less than half hands-on

The small print

They aren't a robot score, and nothing on this page is. Nobody measures how far robots have got well enough to put a number on it. These are the closest thing we have: how hands-on the job is, and how much fiddly, cramped work it takes, which is what Frey and Osborne found hardest for machines.

From O*NET, averaged across 2 US jobs .

finger skill 26.7 · hand skill 21.5 · cramped spaces 17.6 · averaged · rule: hands-on under 50

estimated O*NET 31.0 BLS occupational crosswalk chain ISCO-08 to 2010 SOC (Aug 2012, rev. Jun 2015); 2010 to 2018 SOC (Nov 2017); O*NET-SOC 2019 taxonomy data 0.8-observed-use measures chosen by Frey & Osborne (2017) · the grouping is a sorting, not a measurement

The job, task by task

Every job is really a bundle of tasks. Here's this one unpacked, with how much of each AI could do, out of 100. The score is the average, and averages can hide a lot.

AI's favourite task here scores 51, against an average of 36. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

  1. 51

    Charting the Earth's magnetic field and applying this and other collected data for broadcasting, navigation and other purposes

    Medium
  2. 50

    Studying and measuring physical properties of seas and the atmosphere and their inter-relationship, such as the exchange of thermal energy

    Medium
  3. 49

    Interpreting research data and preparing geological reports, maps, charts and diagrams, reports and papers

    Low
  4. 40

    Advising in areas such as waste management, route and site selection and the restoration of contaminated sites.

    Low
  5. 39

    Conducting research and improving or developing concepts, theories and operational methods related to geology and geophysics

    Low
  6. 38

    Using various remote sensing programmes to investigate and measure seismic, gravitational, electrical, thermal, and magnetic forces affecting the Earth

    Low
  7. 34

    Applying geological knowledge to problems encountered in civil engineering projects such as the construction of dams, bridges, tunnels, and large buildings; and land reclamation projects

    Low
  8. 33

    Researching the movement, distribution and physical properties of ground and surface waters

    Low
  9. 28

    Studying composition and structure of the Earth's crust, examining rocks, minerals, fossils and other materials to determine processes affecting the development of the Earth, trace evolution of past life, establish nature and chronology of geological formations and assess their commercial applications

    Low
  10. 27

    Estimating weight, size and mass of the Earth and composition and structure of its interior, and studying the nature, activity and predictability of volcanoes, glaciers and earthquakes

    Low
  11. 25

    Locating and determining the nature and extent of oil, gas and mineral deposits using seismological, gravimetric, magnetic, electrical or radiometric methods

    Low
  12. 24

    Identifying deposits of construction materials and determining their characteristics and suitability for use as concrete aggregates, road fill or for other applications

    Very Low

12 tasks · the High to Very Low labels are the ILO's

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Sidekick or replacement?

A tool that makes you faster is a very different thing from one that does the task while you watch. Jobs and Skills Australia measured the two separately, which is handy.

AI helps you
72
AI does it for you
33

Sidekick wins, by 39 points.

How good a match is this?

One Australian job matches, but only partly: not everyone in it does this job. Treat the numbers as a rough guide.

estimated Our Gen AI Transition (Gen AI Capacity Study) September 2025 detailed data release data 0.8-observed-use matched to Australian jobs 2344

Meanwhile, in real life…

Everything else here is about what AI could do. This is what people actually did. When they asked Claude for help with this kind of work, did they hand the whole task over, or roll their sleeves up and work through it together?

Tiny sample alert This job makes up under 0.01% of all the conversations: a tiny slice. People using AI for a job isn't the same as AI being able to do it.

Out of every 100 conversations

62
38

worked through it together handed it over

The small print

Anthropic publishes this about its own product, and it doesn't feed into any score here. These are people who use Claude, not workers in general, so little use here doesn't mean AI can't reach the job.

These two add up to 100. The bars elsewhere on the page don't, because each is scored on its own, so we don't put them side by side.

observed use Anthropic Economic Index release 2026-06-26, period beginning 2026-05-01 data 0.8-observed-use 2026-05-01 · Anthropic, about its own product

So, should geologists and geophysicists be worried?

Short answer: not much. Some of the chores will change, and good riddance.

Parts of the job are changing. Charting magnetic fields and studying seas and atmosphere are rated Medium; reports, advice, research, remote sensing, engineering geology, water and deposits are Low; identifying construction materials rates Very Low. AI speeds up data analysis; fieldwork and interpretation stay human.

Worth remembering: we score tasks, not jobs. When AI takes on a task, the job usually reshuffles around it rather than vanishing.

Where this job could lead

None of the new jobs we've written up start from here yet. Could be you're the first. See the jobs AI is creating →

How are the neighbours doing?

There are 92 jobs in the “Professionals” family, averaging 61. This one is above the family average.

Pit this against any other job →