Evaluating the persistence of post‐fire residual patches in the eastern<scp>C</scp>anadian boreal mixedwood forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In boreal forest ecosystems, wildfire severity (i.e. the extent of fire‐related tree mortality) is affected by environmental conditions and fire intensity. A burned area usually includes tree patches that partially or entirely escaped fire, called ‘residual patches’. Although the occurrence of residual patches has been extensively documented, their persistence through time, and thus their capacity to escape several consecutive fires, has not yet been investigated. Macroscopic charcoal particles embedded in organic soils were used to reconstruct the fire history of 13 residual patches of the eastern C anadian boreal mixedwood forest. Our results display the existence of two types of residual patches: (i) patches that only escaped fire by chance, maybe because of local site or meteorological conditions unsuitable for fire spread (random patches), and (ii) patches with lower fire susceptibility, also called ‘fire refuges’ that escaped at least two consecutive fires, probably because of particular site characteristics. Fire refuges can escape fire for more than 500 years, up to several thousand years, and probably burn only during exceptionally severe fire events. Special conservation efforts could target fire refuges owing to their old age, long ecological continuity and potential specific biological diversity associated to different microhabitats.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".