MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047376438 · doi:10.1029/2008jd011361

Comparison of L3JRC and MODIS global burned area products from 2000 to 2007

2009· article· en· W2047376438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Di Chang, Yu Song

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerBiomass burningParticulatesVegetation (pathology)Trace gasClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyGeographyMeteorologyAerosolGeologyEcologySatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a significant source of trace gases and particulate matter to the atmosphere, biomass burning plays an important role in climate change and atmospheric chemistry at regional and global scales. The burned area is a critical parameter in estimating fire emissions. Recently, multiyear global burned area products with medium spatial resolution (1 km or 500 m) have been released, including the L3JRC product and the Collection 5 Moderate‐Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MCD45A1) product. In this study, we compare the spatial distribution and temporal pattern of L3JRC and MCD45A1 burned areas over 7 fire years from 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2007. For these 7 fire years, L3JRC gave global burned areas of 3.89, 4.32, 3.53, 4.43, 3.81, 3.60, and 4.51 million km 2 , and MCD45A1 gave values of 3.44, 3.33, 3.57, 3.38, 3.52, 3.39, and 3.61 million km 2 , respectively. The L3JRC product showed persistent burning activity from April to October, whereas the burned area according to MCD45A1 often peaked in August and December at the global scale. For most continents, the L3JRC and MCD45A1 burned areas compared very well during the fire season; however, for the period outside the fire season, L3JRC generally reported a significantly larger burned area than did MCD45A1. The burned areas were examined according to the main vegetation classes given by the GlobCover product. Validation of the L3JRC and MCD45A1 burned areas was performed using data from ground‐based measurements in Canada, the United States, Russia, and China. The results showed that MCD45A1 was more comparable to reference data, although it often underestimated in the boreal forests. L3JRC generally exhibited significant overestimation in these areas.

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)0.001
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 score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations65
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207