MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3213082167 · doi:10.14288/1.0402623

Revisioning Fire : A study on cultural burning and fire settlement planning

2021· article· en· W3213082167 on OpenAlexaffabout
Théo Van Vugt

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)GeographyEnvironmental scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, I examine the impact fires have had on Canadian communities as a result of climate change and discuss a new form of settlement design that addresses this crisis and offers an efficient solution to community displacement. The history of Canada has marked a departure from and erasure of Indigenous teachings about the regenerative properties of fire and the benefits of working with fire to promote healthier land. Instead, the prevalent mindset extensively deals with fire as something destructive that should be avoided and prevented in all cases. Shifting Canada’s outlook back towards the practice of entertaining fire’s regenerative properties offers a solution to the devastation of wildfires. The proposed new form of settlement design will employ elements of current fire-management design, cultural burning, and a study of local plants’ relationships with fire to help future wildfire prevention and response within the designated community. Taking inspiration from my case studies of the Apete Villages of Brazil, the Camera Botanica of Ian Weir, and the different plants of British Columbia that engage with fire, I developed a six stage process to create a settlement in a fire-prone region of British Columbia. Utilising a combination of quick deployment structures and prefabricated “pods”, a new settlement can take root in wildfire areas as soon as the fires die out. This allows the community to aid in the regrowth of the ecosystem, and provide potentially displaced survivors with new housing quickly. As the community grows, fire management techniques are paired with housing additions to create a community that works together to protect the region, pairing regrowth of community with regrowth of the individual.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicDisaster Management and Resilience→French-language works237,207→