MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099722563 · doi:10.1071/wf02007

Studying wildfire behavior using FIRETEC

2002· article· en· W2099722563 on OpenAlexaff
Rodman Linn, Jon Reisner, Jonah J. Colman, J. Winterkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainFire regimeSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Vegetation (pathology)MeteorologyBorealComputer scienceHomogeneousEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcologyStatistical physicsCartographyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A coupled atmospheric/wildfire behavior model is described that utilizes physics-based process models to represent wildfire behavior. Five simulations are presented, four of which are highly idealized situations that are meant to illustrate some of the dependencies of the model on environmental conditions. The fifth simulation consists of a fire burning in complex terrain with non-homogeneous vegetation and realistic meteorological conditions. The simulated fire behavior develops out of the coupling of a set of very complex processes and not from prescribed rules based on empirical data. This represents a new direction in wildfire modeling that we believe will eventually help decision makers and land managers do their jobs more effectively.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations460
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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