MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299388174 · doi:10.5267/j.jfs.2022.8.003

The role of wildfires in a sustainable future

2022· article· en· W4299388174 on OpenAlexaff
Ebrahim Sharifi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Future Sustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal warmingNatural (archaeology)Environmental scienceClimate changeGreenhouse gasGreenhouse effectNatural disasterEnvironmental protectionEffects of global warmingHabitatGeographyEcologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change and global warming have led to many risks and changes for the Earth, including the increase in natural fires, floods, air pollution, unusual seasons, etc. The increase in the trend of global warming may bring many countries underwater. For instance, the populous Asian nation of Bangladesh is most vulnerable to rising sea levels. It is estimated that a rise of just one meter in sea level is enough to submerge 30,000 square kilometres of the coastal areas of Bangladesh and displace 15 million people. Therefore, it is crucial to determine the effects of different factors on global warming and take possible actions to reduce the damage. Among various factors, natural fires are believed to be responsible for up to 20% of greenhouse gas production in the world. The source of 80% of fresh water in the United States is believed to be forest lands, which means the effect of natural fires can be disastrous not only for drinking water but also for aquatic habitats. In this paper, we present a survey on the impacts of forest fires on global warming.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.001
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Future SustainabilitySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207