Factors influencing travel time and getaway time of helitack crews on wildfires in the province of Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Reducing the delay between the detection of a fire and the arrival of the initial attack (IA) crew can have a significant impact on the likelihood of the IA’s success. Aims The objective of this study was to identify factors influencing same-day getaway time, next-day getaway time and travel time of helitack IA crews in the province of Quebec, Canada. Methods Using generalised linear modelling and model selection, we analysed the impact of multiple factors on these three distinct times. Key results Our results show that factors such as the distance between the departure base and the fire, the number of flight legs to reach a fire, dispatch hour, departure base location, the fire’s rate of spread, Julian date, the number of active fires, fuel type and the fire’s size at detection all influenced getaway time and travel time with varying degrees of influence. Conclusions The factors with the highest influence were distance for travel time and dispatch hour for both same-day and next-day getaway times. Implications Addressing these high-impact factors through the modification of deployment policies and the positioning of helitack crews could help reduce response times.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".