MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055405970 · doi:10.1071/wf12169

Behaviour of fire weather indices in the 2009–10 New Zealand wildland fire season

2014· article· en· W2055405970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Colin C. Simpson, H. Grant Pearce, Andrew Sturman, Peyman Zawar‐Reza

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterUniversity of New South WalesBushfire Cooperative Research Centre
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceFire regimeClimatologyMesoscale meteorologyMeteorologyGeographyEcosystemGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Weather Research and Forecasting mesoscale atmospheric model was used to investigate fire weather conditions during the 2009–10 New Zealand wildland fire season. The analysis considered New Zealand's version of the Fire Weather Index used in the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System, the Haines Index (HI) and the Continuous Haines Index (CHI). This represents the first investigation in New Zealand of the HI and CHI, which rate the potential for extreme fire behaviour or large fire growth based on the lower tropospheric atmospheric stability and humidity. The wildland fire activity during the 2009–10 fire season was typical of New Zealand, and there was considerable spatial and temporal variability in the fire weather conditions. The most frequent severe fire weather conditions as quantified by the fire weather indices occurred to the east of the dividing mountain ranges in both the North Island and South Island, and were associated with the hot, dry and windy north-westerly foehn winds that commonly affect New Zealand. The 36 wildland fires greater in area than 5 ha during the 2009–10 fire season occurred under a range of fire weather conditions, and no correlation was found between the wildland fire size and each individual weather variable.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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