MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972312312 · doi:10.3390/rs11182101

Introducing a New Remote Sensing-Based Model for Forecasting Forest Fire Danger Conditions at a Four-Day Scale

2019· article· en· W2972312312 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M. Razu Ahmed, Quazi K. Hassan, Masoud Abdollahi, Anil Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of Calgary
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceGovernment of AlbertaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexLand coverScale (ratio)Physical geographyVegetation (pathology)MeteorologyLand useGeographyLeaf area indexCartographySatelliteEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fires are natural disasters that create a significant risk to the communities living in the vicinity of forested landscape. To minimize the risk of forest fires for the resilience of such urban communities and forested ecosystems, we proposed a new remote sensing-based medium-term (i.e., four-day) forest fire danger forecasting system (FFDFS) based on an existing framework, and applied the system over the forested regions in the northern Alberta, Canada. Hence, we first employed moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS)-derived daily land surface temperature (Ts) and surface reflectance products along with the annual land cover to generate three four-day composite for Ts, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), and normalized difference water index (NDWI) at 500 m spatial resolution for the next four days over the forest-dominant regions. Upon generating these four-day composites, we calculated the variable-specific mean values to determine variable-specific fire danger maps with two danger classes (i.e., high and low). Then, by assuming the cloud-contaminated pixels as the low fire danger areas, we combined these three danger maps to generate a four-day fire danger map with four danger classes (i.e., low, moderate, high, and very high) over our study area of interest, which was further enhanced by incorporation of a human-caused static fire danger map. Finally, the four-day scale fire danger maps were evaluated using observed/ground-based forest fire occurrences during the 2015–2017 fire seasons. The results revealed that our proposed system was able to detect about 75% of the fire events in the top two danger classes (i.e., high and very high). The system was also able to predict the 2016 Horse River wildfire, the worst fire event in Albertian and Canadian history, with about 67% agreement. The higher accuracy outputs from our proposed model indicated that it could be implemented in the operational management, which would be very useful for lessening the adverse impact of such fire 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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207