MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372211579 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/acd2ee

Accounting for fuel in fire danger forecasts: the fire occurrence probability index (FOPI)

2023· article· en· W4372211579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francesca Di Giuseppe

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsFlammabilityEnvironmental scienceBiomeIndex (typography)Vegetation IndexVegetation (pathology)MeteorologyClimatologyComputer scienceNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexLeaf area indexGeographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new fire danger index is proposed to overcome one of the most important limitations of current fire danger metrics. The fire occurrence probability index (FOPI) combines the Canadian fire weather index (FWI) with remote observations of vegetation characteristics to better predict landscape flammability. The FOPI is designed to improve fire danger predictions in all fuel-limited environments where fire is driven by the short-term drying of intermittently-available fuel. The FOPI considerably outperforms the FWI in arid biomes while remaining comparable to the FWI where fuel is abundant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207