MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125523440 · doi:10.1071/wf06009

Spatial patterns of forest fires in Canada, 1980–1999

2006· article· en· W2125523440 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marc‐André Parisien, Vernon S. Peters, Yonghe Wang, John M. Little, E. M. Bosch, B. J. Stocks

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaThe King's UniversityCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFire regimeSpatial ecologyGeographySpatial variabilityPhysical geographyCommon spatial patternEnvironmental scienceMetric (unit)Spatial analysisSpatial distributionEcosystemRemote sensingEcologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study characterized the spatial patterns of forest fires in 10 fire-dominated ecozones of Canada by using a database of mapped fires ≥200 ha from 1980 to 1999 (n = 5533 fires). Spatial metrics were used individually to compare measures of fire size, shape (eccentricity and complexity), clustering, and geographic orientation among ecozones and were used concurrently in a multivariate analysis. In addition, a set of factors that influence the fire regime at the ecozone level – topography, climate, fuels, and anthropogenic factors – was compared with the metric outputs. We found significant differences in all spatial metrics among ecozones. The multivariate analysis showed that the Montane Cordillera ecozone, which covers most of British Columbia, had the most distinctive fires: its fires were smaller, less complex, and had a more regular distribution. The fire regime descriptors of ecozones were useful to interpret the spatial variation of some spatial metrics, such as fire size, eccentricity, and clustering, but provided little insight into the mechanisms of patterns of fire complexity, which were shown to be sensitive to data quality. Our results provide additional information about the creation of spatially heterogeneous landscapes. Furthermore, they illustrate the potential use of spatial metrics for a more detailed characterization of fire regimes and provide novel information for ecosystems-based land management.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations104
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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