Quantifying surface severity of the 2014 and 2015 fires in the Great Slave Lake area of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this paper was the development of surface organic layer severity maps for the 2014 and 2015 fires in the Great Slave Lake area of the Northwest Territories and Alberta, Canada, using multiple linear regression models generated from pairing field data with Landsat 8 data. Field severity data were collected at 90 sites across the region, together with other site metrics, in order to develop a mapping approach for surface severity, an important metric for assessing carbon loss from fire. The approach utilised a combination of remote sensing indices to build a predictive model of severity that was applied within burn perimeters. Separate models were created for burns in the Shield and Plain ecoregions using spectral data from Landsat 8. The final Shield and Plain models resulted in estimates of surface severity with 0.74 variance explained (R2) for the Plain ecoregions and 0.67 for the Shield. The 2014 fires in the Plain ecoregion were more severe than the 2015 fires and fires in both years in the Shield ecoregion. In further analysis of the field data, an assessment of relationships between surface severity and other site-level severity metrics found mixed results.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".