MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172494291 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2013-0372

A refinement of models projecting future Canadian fire regimes using homogeneous fire regime zones

2014· article· en· W2172494291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsBorealFire regimeHomogeneousEnvironmental scienceSpatial heterogeneityTaigaHfr cellPhysical geographyEcosystemGeographyAtmospheric sciencesEcologyForestryGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Broad-scale fire regime modelling is frequently based on large ecological and (or) administrative units. However, these units may not capture spatial heterogeneity in fire regimes and may thus lead to spatially inaccurate estimates of future fire activity. In this study, we defined homogeneous fire regime (HFR) zones for Canada based on annual area burned (AAB) and fire occurrence (FireOcc), and we used them to model future (2011–2040, 2041–2070, and 2071–2100) fire activity using multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS). We identified a total of 16 HFR zones explaining 47.7% of the heterogeneity in AAB and FireOcc for the 1959–1999 period. MARS models based on HFR zones projected a 3.7-fold increase in AAB and a 3.0-fold increase in FireOcc by 2100 when compared with 1961–1990, with great interzone heterogeneity. The greatest increases would occur in zones located in central and northwestern Canada. Much of the increase in AAB would result from a sharp increase in fire activity during July and August. Ecozone- and HFR-based models projected relatively similar nationwide FireOcc and AAB. However, very high spatial discrepancies were noted between zonations over extensive areas. The proposed HFR zonation should help providing more spatially accurate estimates of future ecological patterns largely driven by fire in the boreal forest such as biodiversity patterns, energy flows, and carbon storage than those obtained from large-scale multipurpose classification units.

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.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · 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