MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322009963 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-9310

Assessing fire danger synchronicity in Europe

2023· preprint· en· W4322009963 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrina Gincheva, Alberto Díaz Moreno, Sónia Jerez, Juan Pedro Montávez, Marco Turco

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchronicityCompromiseFire protectionEnvironmental scienceGeographyClimatologyMeteorologyPolitical scienceLawEngineeringGeologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This contribution seeks to better understand recent changes in synchronous fire danger across Europe that can overwhelm fire suppression capacity. We analyze the spatio-temporal synchronicity of fire danger in Europe over the period 1979-2021 based on the Canadian Fire Weather Index, one of the most commonly used fire indices globally (FWI; Vitolo et al. 2020). The daily synchronicity index indicates the total area with a level of FWI above 50, that represents the extreme fire danger threshold as classified by the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS). The annual mean surface affected by synchronicity extreme fire danger increased by about 100000 km2 over the 42-year-long study period (i.e. 57% of the mean historical value). The expansion of synchronized fire potential can compromise fire management efforts.ReferencesVitolo, C., Di Giuseppe, F., Barnard, C., Coughlan, R., San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., Libertá, G., & Krzeminski, B. (2020). ERA5-based global meteorological wildfire danger maps. Scientific data, 7(1), 1-11.AcknowledgmentsWe acknowledge funding through the project ONFIRE, grant PID2021-123193OB-I00, funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033. A.G. thanks the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades of Spain for PhD contract FPU19/06536.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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