MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394354948 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.4621024

Effects of Climate Change on Canadian Forest Fires

2017· dataset· en· W4394354948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leon Chen, Curtis Chong, Emily Huang, Nathan Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceGeographyPhysical geographyForestryClimatologyEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to determine the effects of climate change on forest fire trends in Canada by measuring correlations between weather conditions and the frequency and size of forest fires. Upon identifying the correlations, a model was created to understand future forest fire trends. The purpose of this study was to prevent the increasing trend of forest fires and devise solutions to reduce their damages. The data obtained from the Canadian National Fire Database underwent a linear regression and a machine learning algorithm to respectively predict and correlate weather conditions with future forest fire trends. It was concluded that temperature and wind speed experienced a positive correlation with forest fire frequency and size and precipitation experienced a negative correlation. To reduce the harmful effects of forest fires, cloud seeding can be used to create more precipitation and wind farms can be built to lower wind speed and attract lightning. However, more research and stricter policies directly targeting climate change are necessary for long term stability or decrease in forest fire trends.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→