Predicting Forest Fire Using Remote Sensing Data And Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last few decades, deforestation and climate change have caused increasing number of forest fires. In Southeast Asia, Indonesia has been the most affected country by tropical peatland forest fires. These fires have a significant impact on the climate resulting in extensive health, social and economic issues. Existing forest fire prediction systems, such as the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System, are based on handcrafted features and require installation and maintenance of expensive instruments on the ground, which can be a challenge for developing countries such as Indonesia. We propose a novel, cost-effective, machine-learning based approach that uses remote sensing data to predict forest fires in Indonesia. Our prediction model achieves more than 0.81 area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve, performing significantly better than the baseline approach which never exceeds 0.70 area under ROC curve on the same tasks. Our model's performance remained above 0.81 area under ROC curve even when evaluated with reduced data. The results support our claim that machine-learning based approaches can lead to reliable and cost-effective forest fire prediction systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".