MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027605665 · doi:10.1139/x04-060

Measurements of radiant emissive power and temperatures in crown fires

2004· article· en· W2027605665 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Bret W. Butler, Jonathan Cohen, Don J. Latham, Robert D. Schuette, Paul Sopko, Kyle Shannon, D. Jiménez, Larry Bradshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceRocky Mountain Research StationU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRadiant fluxAtmospheric sciencesRadiant energyThermocoupleCanopyRadiative transferMeteorologyMaterials scienceRadiationOpticsPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents spatially and temporally resolved measurements of air temperatures and radiant energy fluxes in a boreal forest crown fire. Measurements were collected 3.1, 6.2, 9.2, 12.3, and 13.8 m above the ground surface. Peak air temperatures exceeded 1330 °C, and maximum radiant energy fluxes occurred in the upper third of the forest stand and reached 290 kW·m –2 . Average radiant flux from the flames across all experiments was found to be approximately 200 kW·m –2 . Measured temperatures showed some variation with vertical height in the canopy. Equivalent radiometric temperatures calculated from radiant heat flux measurements exceeded thermocouple-based temperatures for all but the 10-m height, indicating that fire intensity estimates based on thermocouple measurements alone may result in underestimation of actual radiant intensity. The data indicate that the radiative energy penetration distance is significantly longer in the forest canopy than in the lower levels of the forest stand.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations169
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207