MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168715511 · doi:10.1139/x09-153

Potential changes in monthly fire risk in the eastern Canadian boreal forest under future climate change

2009· article· en· W2168715511 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Héloïse Le Goff, Mike Flannigan, Yves Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueUniversité du Québec à MontréalNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest Service
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceTaigaBorealClimatologyGeographyPhysical geographyForestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this paper is to evaluate whether future climate change would trigger an increase in the fire activity of the Waswanipi area, central Quebec. First, we used regression analyses to model the historical (1973–2002) link between weather conditions and fire activity. Then, we calculated Fire Weather Index system components using 1961–2100 daily weather variables from the Canadian Regional Climate Model for the A2 climate change scenario. We tested linear trends in 1961–2100 fire activity and calculated rates of change in fire activity between 1975–2005, 2030–2060, and 2070–2100. Our results suggest that the August fire risk would double (+110%) for 2100, while the May fire risk would slightly decrease (–20%), moving the fire season peak later in the season. Future climate change would trigger weather conditions more favourable to forest fires and a slight increase in regional fire activity (+7%). While considering this long-term increase, interannual variations of fire activity remain a major challenge for the development of sustainable forest 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 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207