MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2083499535 · doi:10.5558/tfc84375-3

Minimum requirements for wildfire investigations

2008· article· en· W2083499535 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul M. Woodard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Quality (philosophy)Fire protectionWildfire suppressionBusinessFire safetyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Computer securityEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Provincial forest management agencies across Canada are attempting to recover suppression costs plus losses to real property due to human-caused fires when negligence is involved. These agencies are responsible for investigating these fires, and they commonly restrict all access to the fire origin area. These agencies commonly employ well trained fire investigators, who are well aware of standards for documenting wildland fires. However, in many cases, the quality of the investigations is poor, and the cost of finding this additional information is great. In this paper, I identify the minimum information required before an investigation file should be considered complete and charges can be laid. Key words: wildland fire, investigation, reports, litigation, standards

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)0.094
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.325
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0940.325
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0110.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0080.007
Research integrity0.0140.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.015

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry Chronicle→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→