MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904891766 · doi:10.1080/19475705.2018.1505667

Using GIS and Random Forests to identify fire drivers in a forest city, Yichun, China

2018· article· en· W2904891766 on OpenAlexaff
Zhangwen Su, Haiqing Hu, Guangyu Wang, Yuanfan Ma, Xiajie Yang, Futao Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomatics Natural Hazards and Risk · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFujian Agriculture and Forestry UniversityAsia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation
KeywordsFire preventionChinaEnvironmental scienceFire hazardHazardGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental protectionForestryEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest city (FC) usually refers to an urban area with high forest coverage. It is a green model of urban development that has been strongly advocated for by governments of many nations. Forest fire is a prominent threat in FC development, but the causes of fires in FCs are usually different and more complex than in pure forested areas since more socio-economic factors and human activity are involved in the ignition and spread of fire. The large and increasing number of lives being exposed to wildfire hazard highlights the need to understand the characteristics of these fires so that forest fire prediction and prevention can be efficient. In this study, Ripley's K(d) function and Random Forests (RF) were applied to analyze the drivers, spatial distribution and risk patterns of fires in Yichun, a typical FC in China. The results revealed a clustered distribution of forest fire ignitions in Yichun, as well as identified the driving factors and their dynamic influence on fire occurrence. Fire risk zones were identified based on RF modelling. Improved preventive measures can be implemented in the fire prone areas to reduce the risk of fire in Yichun by considering the factors identified in this study.

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 score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations46
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeomatics Natural Hazards and RiskSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207