Shrubland fire behaviour modelling with microplot data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fire behaviour modelling has been based primarily on experiments involving the measurement of a certain number of fires, where each variable is represented by an average value per fire. The main objective of this study was to examine if data collected from a microplot sampling design could be used to derive meaningful fire behaviour models. Three burns were conducted in low shrubland of Erica umbellata Loefl., and Chamaespartium tridentatum (L.) P. Gibbs in northeastern Portugal. Wind speed and aerial dead fuel moisture content varied from 5 to 27 km/h and from 14 to 21%, respectively. Rate of spread and flame length ranged from 0.3 to 14.1 m/min and from 0.2 to 3.1 m, respectively. Rate of fire spread could be described effectively in terms of an empirical model with wind speed and fuel height as independent variables. The coefficients that describe the effects of wind speed and fuel height on fire propagation were consistent with published values for similar fuel types. Flame length was strongly related to Byram's fireline intensity. Microplot sampling is not free from methodological problems, which are discussed, but can be effectively used in field studies of fire behaviour.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".