Model Classification of Fire Weather Index using the SVM-FF Method on Forest Fire in North Sumatra, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a tropical country, Indonesia is situated in Southeast Asia nation has vast forests. Forest fire occur busy vary due to land conditions and forest conditions in drought season. The indicator used mitigated potential forest fire is to study the indicator behavior of the fire weather index (FWI). The data is gathered from the observation station in north Sumatra province, computation and estimation FWI by Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index based on the data gathered. It is found that there is gathered outlier data. to hope will it, it is necessary to conduct classification and predict this of the dataset by machine learning approach using Support Vector Machine Forest Fire (SVM-FF), which is a further development of the previous models, known as the c-SVM and v-SVM. This method includes a balancing parameter by determining the lower and upper limits of a support vector. Furthermore, it allowed the balancing parameter value to be negative. The results showed that the classification of FWI was at low, medium, high, and extreme levels. The low FWI value has an average of 0.5 which is in the 0 to 1 interval. There was an increase in the model’s accuracy and performance from its predecessor, which include the c-SVM and v-SVM with respective values of 0.96 and 0.89. Meanwhile, it was observed that with the SVM-FF model, the accuracy was quite better with a value of 0.99, indicating that it is useful as an alternative to classify and predict forest fires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".