MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921147727 · doi:10.1071/wf18164

Inferring energy incident on sensors in low-intensity surface fires from remotely sensed radiation and using it to predict tree stem injury

2019· article· en· W2921147727 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew B. Dickinson, Bret W. Butler, Andrew T. Hudak, Benjamin C. Bright, Robert L. Kremens, Carine Klauberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsFederated Co-operatives (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingNadirRadiometerRadiant energyShrubBorealRadiative transferAtmospheric sciencesRadiationEcologyGeologyPhysicsSatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remotely sensed radiation, attractive for its spatial and temporal coverage, offers a means of inferring energy deposition in fires (e.g. on soils, fuels and tree stems) but coordinated remote and in situ (in-flame) measurements are lacking. We relate remotely sensed measurements of fire radiative energy density (FRED) from nadir (overhead) radiometers on towers and the Wildfire Airborne Sensor Program (WASP) infrared camera on a piloted, fixed-wing aircraft to energy incident on insitu, horizontally oriented, wide-angle total flux sensors positioned ~0.5 m above ground level. Measurements were obtained in non-forested herbaceous and shrub-dominated sites and in (forested) longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Miller) savanna. Using log–log scaling to reveal downward bias, incident energy was positively related to FRED from nadir radiometers (R2 = 0.47) and WASP (R2 = 0.50). As a demonstration of how this result could be used to describe ecological effects, we predict stem injury for turkey oak (Quercus laevis Walter), a common tree species at our study site, using incident energy inferred from remotely sensed FRED. On average, larger-diameter stems were expected to be killed in the forested than in the non-forested sites. Though the approach appears promising, challenges remain for remote and insitu measurement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Wildland FireSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207