MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1605872169 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1208.1059

WRF fire simulation coupled with a fuel moisture model and smoke transport by WRF-Chem

2012· preprint· en· W1605872169 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam K. Kochanski, Jonathan Beezley, Jan Mandel, Minjeong Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeather Research and Forecasting ModelEnvironmental scienceAtmosphere (unit)MoistureMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesSmokeClimatologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe two recent additions to WRF coupled with a fire spread model. Fire propagation is strongly dependent on fuel moisture, which in turn depends on the history of the atmosphere. We have implemented a equilibrium time-lag model of fuel moisture driven by WRF variables. The code allows the user to specify fuel parameters, with the defaults calibrated to the Canadian fire danger rating system for 10-hour fuel. The moisture model can run coupled with the atmosphere-fire model, or offline from WRF output to equilibrate the moisture over a period of time and to provide initial moisture conditions for a coupled atmosphere-fire-moisture simulation. The fire model also inserts smoke tracers into WRF-Chem to model the transport of fire emissions. The coupled model is available from OpenWFM.org. An earlier version of the fire model coupled with atmosphere is a part of WRF release.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.138 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→