MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393859891 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2024-0032

The evolving role of wildfire in the Maritimes region of eastern Canada

2024· article· en· W4393859891 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Anthony R. Taylor, David A. MacLean

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyPhysical geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Maritimes region of eastern Canada is not typically associated with wildfire, but the severe 2023 fire season has reminded “Maritimers” that despite its cool, damp climate and diverse, mixed forests, the region is not immune to burning. In this perspectives article, we review the relationship of wildfire and the Maritimes by first providing a brief history on the role fire has played in shaping the forests of the Maritimes and our part in that relationship. We then describe the current state of wildfire management, including strategies and technologies used to prevent fire, and identify some key important challenges moving forward. Overall, our review shows that the people of this region have a long history with wildfire, but that since European colonization (1600s) the local fire regime has undergone significant shifts. While the introduction of forest protection legislation and technology during the early 20th century has greatly reduced the occurrence of fire and substantially lengthened the fire return interval, the growing, sprawling population of the Maritimes presents new challenges for managing fire in the wildland–urban interface. Combined with the threat of climate change, which is likely to increase the occurrence of wildfire, new urban planning and forest management strategies must be developed to address these emerging dangers.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→