Mapping fuels in Yosemite National Park
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decades of fire suppression have led to unnaturally large accumulations of fuel in some forest communities in the western United States, including those found in lower and midelevation forests in Yosemite National Park in California. We employed the Random Forests decision tree algorithm to predict fuel models as well as 1-h live and 1-, 10-, and 100-h dead fuel loads using a suite of climatic, topographic, remotely sensed, and burn history predictor variables. Climate variables and elevation consistently were most useful for predicting all types of fuels, but remotely sensed variables increased the kappa accuracy metric by 5%–12% age points in each case, demonstrating the utility of using disparate data sources in a topographically diverse region dominated by closed-canopy vegetation. Fire history information (time-since-fire) generally only increased kappa by 1% age point, and only for the largest fuel classes. The Random Forests models were applied to the spatial predictor layers to produce maps of fuel models and fuel loads, and these showed that fuel loads are highest in the low-elevation forests that have been most affected by fire suppression impacting the natural fire regime.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".