Unveiling Wildfire Dynamics: A Bayesian County-Specific Analysis in California
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, the United States has experienced, on average, costs of USD 20 billion due to natural and climate disasters, such as hurricanes and wildfires. In this study, we focus on wildfires, which have occurred more frequently in the past few years. This paper examines how various factors, such as the PM10 levels, elevation, precipitation, SOX, population, and temperature, can influence the intensity of wildfires differently across counties in California. More specifically, we use Bayesian analysis to classify all counties of California into two groups: those with more wildfires and those with fewer wildfires. The Bayesian model incorporates prior knowledge and uncertainty for a more robust understanding of how these environmental factors impact wildfires differently among county groups. The findings show a similar effect of the SOX, population, and temperature, while the PM10, elevation, and precipitation have different implications for wildfires across various groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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 it