A Neural Network Model for Wildfire Scale Prediction Using Meteorological Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A forest fire is a natural disaster that destroys forest resources, thus having a severe impact on humans and on the animals and plants that depend on the forest environment. This paper presents a model for predicting the scale of forest wildfires of Alberta, Canada. A fire's scale is determined by the combination of the fire's duration and the size of the area it burns. Our prediction model enables fire rescuers to take appropriate measures to minimize damage caused by a wildfire based on its predicted scale in the fire's early stages. The modeling data were collected from the Canada National Fire Database (CNFDB) published by Natural Resources Canada, which includes wildfire and meteorological data for Alberta, Canada. The size of the burned area and the fire's duration were used to estimate the scale of a wildfire. After multi-collinearity testing and feature normalization, the data were divided into training and testing sets. Taking the meteorological factors as input values, a backpropagation neural network (BPNN), a recurrent neural network (RNN), and long short-term memory (LSTM) were implemented to establish prediction models. Of these classification methods, LSTM exhibited the highest accuracy, 90.9%. The results indicate that it is feasible to predict the scale of a forest wildfire at the beginning of its occurrence using meteorological information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".