MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008791821 · doi:10.1071/wf06091

Modelling emissions from Canadian wildfires: a case study of the 2002 Quebec fires

2007· article· en· W2008791821 on OpenAlexafffundabout
D. Lavoué, Sunling Gong, B. J. Stocks

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsOntario Forest Research InstituteBrampton Civic HospitalCanadian Forest ServiceBell (Canada)Natural Resources CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBorealParticulatesTaigaGreenhouse gasAtmospheric sciencesBlack spruceClimatologyAtmosphere (unit)MeteorologyFire regimeSmokePhysical geographyGeographyEcosystemForestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper proposes an original approach to estimate gaseous and particulate emissions from boreal forest fires based on the Canadian Forest Fire Behaviour Prediction (FBP) System. The FBP System permits calculation of fuel consumption and rate of spread for individual fires on an hourly basis from meteorological conditions and fuel patterns. Weather data are obtained by running the Canadian weather forecast model GEM (Global Environmental Multiscale). Hourly emission point sources can then be generated from a given wildfire database. The smoke emission model was first applied to the boreal forest fires in Quebec in the summer of 2002. Geographical distribution and temporal variability of emission amounts, as well as injection heights, were assessed hourly. In July, ~150 wildfires released 39 Mt of CO2 equivalent of greenhouse gases and 470 kt of fine particulate matter to the atmosphere. They contributed 32 and 5% of Quebec’s and Canada’s annual greenhouse gas emissions, respectively. Black carbon was estimated to account for 4% of the total fine particulate matter. Wildfires were responsible for 51 and 90% of all Canada’s black carbon and particulate organic matter sources, respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Wildland FireSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207