MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2269080556

PREDICTION OF FOREST FIRE USING WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK

2015· article· en· W2269080556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Demin Gao, X. Yin, Yahong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF TROPICAL FOREST SCIENCE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRating systemFire preventionWildfire suppressionFire detectionMeteorologyChinaFirefightingForestryGeographyEngineeringCartographyArchitectural engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GAO DM, YIN XF & LIU YF. 2015. Prediction of forest fire using wireless sensor network . High incidence and destructiveness of forest fire determine the importance of forest fire prevention. Based upon local weather observations, one of the most recognised and widely applied fire-danger rating systems, the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index (CFFWI) System, was found highly correlated with forest fire occurrence. This fire-danger system was evaluated and calibrated for Nanjing, the capital of Jiangsu Province, China. This wireless sensor network was utilised for collecting 24-hour weather data continuously. The components of CFFWI System, based upon the weather data for this region, provided insight of possibility of forest fires. The system showed that spring and autumn were seasons when the occurrences of forest fires were more dangerous. The components of the system indicated the possible dangers of the ignition of forest before the fire started. The components of CFFWI System are good indicators of fire danger in the Nanjing region of China and can be expended to build a working fire-danger rating system for the region.

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)0.001
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 score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF TROPICAL FOREST SCIENCESame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207