MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901755757 · doi:10.22498/pages.26.2.88

African fire histories and fire ecologies

2018· article· en· W2901755757 on OpenAlexaff
Colin J. Courtney Mustaphi, Danièle Colombaroli, Boris Vannière, Carole Adolf, Laurent Brémond, Julie C. Aleman

Bibliographic record

VenuePast Global Change Magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAfrican Botany and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary sciencePublicsPolitical scienceDisciplineEthnologyHumanitiesHistoryArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns of fire are changing across African savannahs, rainforests, fynbos, woodlands, and Afroalpine and montane forests, with direct environmental and socio-ecological consequences. Fire variability has implications for biodiversity (Beale et al. 2018), vegetation patterns, grazing quality, carbon emissions, protected area management, and landscape heterogeneity. Fire is a crucial component of savannah functioning and structure and is essential for maintaining its biodiversity. Long-term records are key to understanding drivers of fire variability and contextualize recent and ongoing land-use changes that altered fire responses to climate and vegetation changes (e.g. Ekblom and Gillson 2010, Colombaroli et al. 2014). As indigenous forest loss continues and modification through selective harvesting and land-use encroachment accelerate forest changes, the importance of historical disturbance regimes is increasingly relevant for assessing past ranges of variability and to define management targets that support more resilient socioecological systems (Whitlock et al. 2018). But how can the research community engage and integrate with land-management practitioners and policy developers? And how can we promote knowledge transfer and collaborative capacity between the international community and the next generation of African scientists?

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)0.000
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 score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePast Global Change MagazineSame topicAfrican Botany and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207