MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321995497 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-9791

Lightning in a changing climate and its impacts on fire area burned

2023· preprint· en· W4321995497 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cynthia Whaley, Courtney Schumacher, Montana Etten‐Bohm, Vivek K. Arora, David A. Plummer, Jason A. Cole, Michael Lazare, Ayodeji Akingunola

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLightning (connector)Environmental scienceMeteorologyClimate changeAtmosphere (unit)Climate modelAtmospheric sciencesAtmospheric electricityClimatologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lightning is an important atmospheric process for igniting forest fires – often in remote locations where they are not easily suppressed – which results in potentially large emissions of many pollutants and short-lived climate forcers. Lightning also generates reactive nitrogen, resulting in the production of tropospheric ozone, the third most important greenhouse gas. Furthermore, the changing climate is expected to change the frequency and location of lightning. As such, lightning is an important component of climate models. The Canadian Atmospheric Model, CanAM, is one such climate model that did not contain an 'online' lightning parameterization. Fire ignition in CanAM was done via an unchanging climatological lightning input. In this study, we have added a new logistical regression lightning model (Etten-Bohm et al, 2021) into CanAM, creating the capacity for future lightning predictions with CanAM under different climate scenarios. The modelled lightning and fire area burned were evaluated against measurements in a historical period with good results. Then we simulate lightning and fire area burned in a future climate scenario in order to provide an estimate on how lightning and its impacts will change in the future. This study also presents the first time that CanAM’s land fire model was used online with its atmosphere to fully simulate fires in the global earth system.Reference:Etten-Bohm, M., J. Yang, C. Schumacher, and M. Jun : Evaluating the relationship between lightning and the large-scale environment and its use for lightning prediction in global climate models, JGR-atmospheres, 126, e2020JD033990, 2021.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→