Gis and fuzzy logic approach for forest fire risk modeling in the Cajamarca region, Peru
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest fires are a potential threat to life, as they contribute to reducing forest areas, impact on the services we expect from ecosystems, the health of the inhabitants is affected by smoke and the economic costs for the recovery of affected areas is high. The objective of the study is to apply fuzzy logic to model the risk of forest fires in the Cajamarca-Peru region, incorporating variables that represent biological, topographic, socioeconomic, and meteorological factors. The analysis was based on the acquisition, editing and rasterization of the database, application of fuzzy membership functions and image fuzzification, fuzzy superposition and spatial reclassification of forest fire risk. The results obtained show that 71.68% of the area is under very low or medium forest fire risk. However, 28.32% of the study area has a high to very high fire risk, which makes the occurrence of fires susceptible to the lack of rain and water in the soil. It was found that biological, topographic, and socioeconomic factors with their respective variables are directly influenced by meteorological factor variables such as temperature, rainfall and water availability. Fuzzy logic offered flexibility in modeling wildfire risk in the region, proving to be a useful tool for predicting and mapping wildfire risk.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".