MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210439676 · doi:10.1007/s10694-021-01194-y

Quantifying Firebrand Production and Transport Using the Acoustic Analysis of In-Fire Cameras

2022· article· en· W4210439676 on OpenAlexaff
Dan K. Thompson, Daniel A. Yip, Eunmo Koo, Rod Linn, Ginny Marshall, Razim Refai, Dave Schroeder

Bibliographic record

VenueFire Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsWildlife Conservation Society CanadaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReplicateMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Firebrand travel and ignition of spot fires is a major concern in the Wildland-Urban Interface and in wildfire operations overall. Firebrands allow for the efficient breaching across fuel-free barriers such as roads, rivers and constructed fuel breaks. Existing observation-based knowledge on medium-distance firebrand travel is often based on single tree experiments that do not replicate the intensity and convective updraft of a continuous crown fire. Recent advances in acoustic analysis, specifically pattern detection, has enabled the quantification of the rate at which firebrands are observed in the audio recordings of in-fire cameras housed within fire-proof steel boxes that have been deployed on experimental fires. The audio pattern being detected is the sound created by a flying firebrand hitting the steel box of the camera. This technique allows for the number of firebrands per second to be quantified and can be related to the fire's location at that same time interval (using a detailed rate of spread reconstruction) in order to determine the firebrand travel distance. A proof of concept is given for an experimental crown fire that shows the viability of this technique. When related to the fire's location, key areas of medium-distance spotting are observed that correspond to regions of peak fire intensity. Trends on the number of firebrands landing per square metre as the fire approaches are readily quantified using low-cost instrumentation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFire TechnologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207