MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977157632 · doi:10.3390/f10100838

Variation in the Canadian Fire Weather Index Thresholds for Increasingly Larger Fires in Portugal

2019· article· en· W2977157632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paulo M. Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceShrublandFire regimeMediterranean climateFlammable liquidPhysical geographyGeographyMediterranean BasinFire protectionClimatologyEcosystemEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fire management relies on fire danger rating to optimize its suite of activities. Limiting fire size is the fire management target whenever minimizing burned area is the primary goal, such as in the Mediterranean Basin. Within the region, wildfire incidence is especially acute in Portugal, a country where fire-influencing anthropogenic and landscape features vary markedly within a relatively small area. This study establishes daily fire weather thresholds associated to transitions to increasingly larger fires for individual Portuguese regions (2001–2011 period), using the national wildfire and Canadian fire weather index (FWI) databases and logistic regression. FWI thresholds variation in relation to population density, topography, land cover, and net primary production (NPP) metrics is examined through regression and cluster analysis. Larger fires occur under increasingly higher fire danger. Resistance to fire spread (the fire-size FWI thresholds) varies regionally following biophysical gradients, and decreases under more complex topography and when NPP and occupation by flammable forest or by shrubland increase. Three main clusters synthesize these relationships and roughly coincide with the western north-central, eastern north-central and southern parts of the country. Quantification of fire-weather relationships can be improved through additional variables and analysis at other spatial scales.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207