MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096470324 · doi:10.1071/wf12186

An evaluation of fire danger and behaviour indices in the Great Lakes Region calculated from station and gridded weather information

2014· article· en· W2096470324 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John D. Horel, Robert Ziel, Chris Galli, Judith Pechmann, Xia Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyNational weather serviceClimatologyFire regimePrecipitationGeographyGeologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A web-based set of tools has been developed to integrate weather, fire danger and fire behaviour information for the Great Lakes region of the United States. Weather parameters obtained from selected observational networks are combined with operational high-resolution gridded analyses and forecast products from the United States National Weather Service. Fuel moisture codes and fire behaviour indices in the Fire Weather Index subsystem of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System are computed from these sources for current and forecast conditions. Applications of this Great Lakes Fire and Fuels System are demonstrated for the 2012 fire season. Fuel moisture codes and fire behaviour indices computed from gridded analyses differ from those derived from observations in a manner similar to the analysis errors typical for the underlying weather parameters. Indices that are particularly sensitive to seasonally accumulating precipitation, such as the Drought Code, exhibit the largest differences. The gridded analyses and forecasts provide considerable additional information for fire weather professionals to evaluate weather and fuel state in the region. The potential utility of these gridded analyses and forecasts throughout the continental United States is highlighted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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