Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The Global Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System (GFFEPS) is a model that estimates biomass burning in real time for global air-quality forecasting. The model uses a bottom-up approach, based on remotely-sensed hotspot locations and global databases linking burned area per hotspot to ecosystem-type classification at a 1-km resolution. Unlike other global forest fire emissions models, GFFEPS provides dynamic estimates of fuel consumption and fire behaviour based on the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System. Combining forecasts of daily fire weather and hourly meteorological conditions with a global land classification, GFFEPS produces fuel consumption and emission predictions in 3-hour time steps (in contrast to non-dynamic models that use fixed consumption rates and require collection of burned area to make post-burn estimates of emissions). GFFEPS has been designed for use in near-real-time forecasting applications as well as historical simulations for which data are available. A study was conducted running GFFEPS through a six-year period (2015–2020). Regional annual total smoke emissions, burned area and total fuel consumption per unit area as predicted by GFFEPS were generated to assess model performance over multiple years and regions. The model distinguished grass-dominated regions from forested, while also showed high variability in regions affected by El Niño and deforestation. GFFEPS carbon emissions and burned area were then compared to other global wildfire emissions models, including GFAS, GFED4.1s and FINN1.5/2.5. GFFEPS estimated values lower than GFAS/GFED (80 %/74 %), and estimated values similar to FINN1.5 (97 %). This was largely due to the impact of fuel moisture on consumption rates as captured by the dynamic weather modelling. An effort is underway to validate the model, with further developments and improvements expected.
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 | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.230 | 0.182 |
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".