An assessment of fire occurrence regime and performance of Canadian fire weather index in south central Siberian boreal region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Wildfire is the dominant natural disturbance in Eurasian boreal region, which acts as a major driver of the global carbon cycle. An effectiveness of wildfire management requires suitable tools for fire prevention and fire risk assessment. This study aims to investigate fire occurrence patterns in relation to fire weather conditions in the remote south central Siberia region. The Canadian Fire Weather Index derived from large-scale meteorological reanalysis data was evaluated with respects to fire regimes during 14 consecutive fire seasons in south central Siberian environment. All the fire weather codes and indices, including the Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC), the Duff Moisture Code (DMC), the Drought Code (DC), the Buildup Index (BUI), the Initial Spread Index (ISI), and the Fire Weather Index (FWI), were highly reflected inter-annual variation of fire activity in south central Siberia. Even though human-caused fires were major events in Russian boreal forest including south central Siberia, extreme fire years were strongly correlated with ambient weather conditions (e.g. Arctic Oscillation, air temperature, relative humidity and wind), showing by in-phase (or positive linear relationship) and significant wavelet coherence between fire activity and DMC, ISI, BUI, and FWI. Time series observation of 14 fire seasons showed that there was an average of about 3 months lags between the peaks of fire weather conditions and fire activity, which should take into account when using coarse scale fire weather indices in the assessment of fire danger in the study area. The results are expected to contribute to a better reconstruction and prediction of fire activity using large-scale reanalysis data in remote regions in which station data are very few.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".