MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120855332 · doi:10.1071/wf07149

Large fires as agents of ecological diversity in the North American boreal forest

2008· article· en· W2120855332 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Philip J. Burton, Marc‐André Parisien, Jeffrey A. Hicke, Ronald J. Hall, Jason T. Freeburn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceCanadian Space AgencyAustralian GovernmentUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsBorealTaigaVegetation (pathology)Fire regimePhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceLand coverEcologyGeographyHabitatFire ecologyBiotaLand useForestryEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study undertook a hierarchical analysis of the variability within and among some individual fire events in the boreal ecozones of Canada and Alaska. When stratified by ecozone, differences in the spatial and temporal distribution of wildfires were observed in the Canadian Large Fire Data Base that reflect climatic, terrain and land-use differences across the country. Remote-sensing data collected before and after boreal forest fires permitted a rigorous analysis of the variability in burn severity within individual fire events, and the identification of certain fire-prone and more fire-resistant land-cover types. The occurrence of fire skips or islands was related to the distribution of those cover types, resulting in proportionally more unburned area within the perimeter of a burn for larger fires. Differences in burn severity led to differences in post-burn vegetation response of tree, shrub and moss layers that can persist for decades or even centuries. As a result, there can be considerable variability in the survival, density and distribution of residual biota and organic materials. This variability creates a range of post-fire vegetation patterns and contributes much to the habitat diversity of boreal landscapes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations178
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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