MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390663404 · doi:10.3390/rs16020230

Unrecorded Tundra Fires in Canada, 1986–2022

2024· article· en· W4390663404 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matthew G. Hethcoat, Piyush Jain, Marc‐André Parisien, Rob Skakun, Luka Rogic, Ellen Whitman

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraArcticPhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceClimate changeCircumpolar starClimatologyTaigaGeographyRemote sensingGeologyForestryOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate-driven changes in fire regimes are expected across the pan-Arctic region. Trends in arctic fires are thought to be generally increasing; however, fire mapping across the region is far from comprehensive or systematic. We developed a new detection workflow and built a dataset of unrecorded tundra fires in Canada using Landsat data. We built a reference dataset of spectral indices from previously mapped fires in northern Canada to train a Random Forest model for detecting new fires between 1986 and 2022. In addition, we used time series information for each pixel to reduce false positives and narrow the large search space down to a finite set of regions that had experienced changes. We found 209 previously undetected fires in the Arctic and sub-Arctic regions, increasing the mapped burned area by approximately 30%. The median fire size was small, with roughly 3/4 of the fires being <100 ha in size. The majority of newly detected fires (69%) did not have satellite-derived hotspots associated with them. The dataset presented here is commission error-free and can be viewed as a reference dataset for future analyses. Moreover, future improvements and updates will leverage these data to improve the detection workflow outlined here, particularly for small and low-severity fires. These data can facilitate broader analyses that examine trends and environmental drivers of fire across the Arctic region. Such analyses could begin to untangle the mechanisms driving heterogeneous fire responses to climate observed across regions of the Circumpolar North.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207