MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288926139 · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2022.105473

The Dynamic Temperate and Boreal Fire and Forest-Ecosystem Simulator (DYNAFFOREST): Development and evaluation

2022· article· en· W4288926139 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Winslow D. Hansen, Meg A. Krawchuk, Anna T. Trugman, Park Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Modelling & Software · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Research Institute, California State UniversityNational Institute of Food and AgricultureEnvironmental Defense FundU.S. Department of EnergyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationRoyal Bank of CanadaUniversity of CaliforniaZegar Family FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiomeTaigaBorealTemperate climateEnvironmental scienceDisturbance (geology)Temperate rainforestTemperate forestFire regimeClimate changeForest dynamicsForest ecologyBoreal ecosystemFire ecologyEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcologyGeographyPhysical geographyForestryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fire is a dominant disturbance in temperate and boreal biomes, and increasing burned area with climate change may fundamentally alter forests. Improved information about how fire-induced changes to forests may feedback to affect subsequent burning at regional scales could inform forest management and climate-mitigation strategies. However, fire is simplistically represented in Earth System Models, and regional statistical fire models often assume sufficient fuels, contributing to uncertainty in future projections. To address this challenge, we developed the Dynamic Temperate and Boreal Fire and Forest-Ecosystem Simulator (DYNAFFOREST). DYNAFFOREST represents the hierarchical structuring of forests, from individual cohorts to continental extents, making it possible to simulate feedbacks between fire and forests at broad scales over decades to centuries. We parameterized DYNAFFOREST for the western United States of America and benchmarked simulations with observations. DYNAFFOREST recreated patterns of forest cover, structure, and downed fuels, and was capable of capturing average 20th-century fire activity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Modelling & SoftwareSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207