MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404081955 · doi:10.5194/gmd-17-7713-2024

The Global Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System version 1.0

2024· article· en· W4404081955 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kerry Anderson, Jack Chen, Peter Englefield, Debora Griffin, Paul A. Makar, Dan K. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsOntario Forest Research InstituteEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGreenhouse gasClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The Global Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System (GFFEPS) is a model that estimates biomass burning in near-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 fire emissions models, GFFEPS provides dynamic estimates of fuel consumption, fire behaviour and fire growth based on the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System, plant phenology as calculated from daily global weather and burned-area estimates using near-real-time Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) satellite-detected hotspots and historical burned-area statistics. Combining forecasts of daily fire weather and hourly meteorological conditions with a global land classification, GFFEPS produces fuel consumption and emission predictions in 3 h time steps (in contrast to non-dynamic models that use fixed consumption rates and require a collection of burned area to make post-burn estimates of emissions). GFFEPS has been designed for use in operational forecasting applications as well as historical simulations for which data are available. A study was conducted showing GFFEPS predictions through a 6-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's fuel consumption per unit area results clearly distinguished regions dominated by grassland (Africa) from those dominated by forests (boreal regions) and 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 the Global Fire Assimilation System (GFAS), the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED4.1s) and the Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN 1.5 and 2.5). GFFEPS estimated values lower than GFAS and GFED (80 % and 74 %) and had values similar to FINN 1.5 (97 %). This was largely due to the impact of fuel moisture on consumption rates as captured by the dynamic weather modelling. Model evaluation efforts to date are described – an ongoing effort is underway to further validate the model, with further developments and improvements expected in the future.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.017

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscientific model developmentSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207