MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022974530 · doi:10.1890/10-0326.1

Scale-dependent controls on the area burned in the boreal forest of Canada, 1980–2005

2010· article· en· W2022974530 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaigaBorealEcologyScale (ratio)Environmental scienceGeographyBoreal ecosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the boreal forest of North America, as in any fire-prone biome, three environmental factors must coincide for a wildfire to occur: an ignition source, flammable vegetation, and weather that is conducive to fire. Despite recent advances, the relative importance of these factors remains the subject of some debate. The aim of this study was to develop models that identify the environmental controls on spatial patterns in area burned for the period 1980-2005 at several spatial scales in the Canadian boreal forest. Boosted regression tree models were built to relate high-resolution data for area burned to an array of explanatory variables describing ignitions, vegetation, and long-term patterns in fire-conducive weather (i.e., fire climate) at four spatial scales (10(2) km2, 10(3) km2, 10(4) km2, and 10(5) km2). We evaluated the relative contributions of these controls on area burned, as well as their functional relationships, across spatial scales. We also assessed geographic patterns of the influence of wildfire controls. The results indicated that extreme temperature during the fire season was a top control at all spatial scales, followed closely by a wind-driven index of ease of fire spread. However, the contributions of some variables differed substantially among the spatial scales, as did their relationship to area burned. In fact, for some key variables the polarity of relationships was inverted from the finest to the broadest spatial scale. It was difficult to unequivocally attribute values of relative importance to the variables chosen to represent ignitions, vegetation, and climate, as the interdependence of these factors precluded clear partitioning. Furthermore, the influence of a variable on patterns of area burned often changed enormously across the biome, which supports the idea that fire-environment relationships in the boreal forest are complex and nonstationary.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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