MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394877409 · doi:10.3390/fire7040144

Anticipating Future Risks of Climate-Driven Wildfires in Boreal Forests

2024· article· en· W4394877409 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFire · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorealClimate changeTaigaEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationClimatologyBoreal ecosystemRepresentative Concentration PathwaysPhysical geographyGeneral Circulation ModelEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcologyMeteorologyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme forest fires have historically been a significant concern in Canada, the Russian Federation, the USA, and now pose an increasing threat in boreal Europe. This paper deals with application of the wildFire cLimate impacts and Adaptation Model (FLAM) in boreal forests. FLAM operates on a daily time step and utilizes mechanistic algorithms to quantify the impact of climate, human activities, and fuel availability on wildfire probabilities, frequencies, and burned areas. In our paper, we calibrate the model using historical remote sensing data and explore future projections of burned areas under different climate change scenarios. The study consists of the following steps: (i) analysis of the historical burned areas over 2001–2020; (ii) analysis of temperature and precipitation changes in the future projections as compared to the historical period; (iii) analysis of the future burned areas projected by FLAM and driven by climate change scenarios until the year 2100; (iv) simulation of adaptation options under the worst-case scenario. The modeling results show an increase in burned areas under all Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. Maintaining current temperatures (RCP 2.6) will still result in an increase in burned area (total and forest), but in the worst-case scenario (RCP 8.5), projected burned forest area will more than triple by 2100. Based on FLAM calibration, we identify hotspots for wildland fires in the boreal forest and suggest adaptation options such as increasing suppression efficiency at the hotspots. We model two scenarios of improved reaction times—stopping a fire within 4 days and within 24 h—which could reduce average burned forest areas by 48.6% and 79.2%, respectively, compared to projected burned areas without adaptation from 2021–2099.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · 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