MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965595054 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2019/636

FireCast: Leveraging Deep Learning to Predict Wildfire Spread

2019· article· en· W2965595054 on OpenAlexaff
David Radke, Anna Hessler, Dan Ellsworth

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRandom forestGeographic information systemClimate changeMachine learningMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Destructive wildfires result in billions of dollars in damage each year and are expected to increase in frequency, duration, and severity due to climate change. The current state-of-the-art wildfire spread models rely on mathematical growth predictions and physics-based models, which are difficult and computationally expensive to run. We present and evaluate a novel system, FireCast. FireCast combines artificial intelligence (AI) techniques with data collection strategies from geographic information systems (GIS). FireCast predicts which areas surrounding a burning wildfire have high-risk of near-future wildfire spread, based on historical fire data and using modest computational resources. FireCast is compared to a random prediction model and a commonly used wildfire spread model, Farsite, outperforming both with respect to total accuracy, recall, and F-score.

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)0.002
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations116
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207