Flame temperature and residence time of fires in dry eucalypt forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperature profiles of flames were measured using arrays of thermocouples on towers located in experimental bushfires of varying intensity, carried out in dry eucalypt forest of different fuel age and structure. In-fire video of flame-front passage and time series data from very fine exposed thermocouples were used to estimate the duration of passage of the main flaming front in these experimental fires. Flame temperature measured at points within the flame was found to vary with height; maximum flame temperature was greater in the tall shrub fuel than in the low shrub fuel sites. A model to estimate flame temperature at any height within a flame of a specific height was developed. The maximum flame temperature observed was ~1100°C near the flame base and, when observation height was normalised by flame height, flame temperature exponentially decreased to the visible flame tip where temperatures were ~300°C. Maximum flame temperature was significantly correlated with rate of spread, fire intensity, flame height and surface fuel bulk density. Average flame-front residence time for eucalypt forest fuels was 37 s and did not vary significantly with fine fuel moisture, fuel quantity or bulk density.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".