Dendrochronological Investigations of the Fire History in the Sinclair Restoration Area, Kootenay National Park, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest structure in the Rocky Mountains has been affected by fire suppression of one form or another during the last 100 years. This project characterized fire dynamics of an Interior Douglas-fir forest in Sinclair Restoration Area of Kootenay National Park, British Columbia. This study was completed by collecting fire scarred trees and establishment plot dynamics within the Sinclair Restoration Area. The fire history was then compared against fire histories from similar locations and forest compositions in the Pacific Northwest. As well, a review of indigenous use, by the Ktunaxa and Shuswap, of the Sinclair Restoration Area and burning practices is completed. It is posited that a low severity high frequency late fall fire regime occurred at Sinclair Restoration Area during the period of 1795 to 1889. Data indicated that regeneration of Douglas-fir in the stand is related to fire events. Since the last fire event that stand has shifted away from open grassland, with mature occasional Douglas-fir, to a densely stocked Douglas-fir forest. Fire years align with trends seen with others throughout forests of the Rocky Mountains, possibly indicating that climate is affecting the fire regime. However, the characteristics of fire events in the Sinclair Restoration area align with burning practices of the Ktunaxa and Shuswap nations who utilized the study site and surrounding region. Fire events in the Sinclair Restoration Area stop around the time of European settlement in the area. Additionally, no fire event has been observed in the study area since 1889. The fire regime of the Sinclair Restoration Area may be the result of a combination of climate and indigenous induced burning events.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".