MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Forest structure, roads and soil moisture provide realistic predictions of fire spread in modern Swedish landscape

2024· article· en· W4404408577 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Sharon Jones, Maksym Matsala, Emily Delin, Narayanan Subramanian, Emma Holmström, Igor Drobyshev

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Modelling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCégep de l'Abitibi TémiscamingueUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceFire ecologyEcologyHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyGeographyGeologyGeotechnical engineeringEcosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Vegetation properties can be used to predict forest fire susceptibility in Sweden. • High Scots pine stock increases fire susceptibility; deciduous species’ decrease it. • Cellular automata model can realistically predict fire risks in Swedish forests. Recent increases in fire activity in Sweden call for the quantification of forest fire susceptibility, in order to develop management strategies to mitigate fire risk. Using the data from 100 large Swedish forest fires (>10 ha), mapped from sentinel-2 images from 2016 to 2022, we explored the predictive power of vegetation properties in estimating relative likelihood of fires within a landscape using logistic regression. To model spatially explicit fire susceptibility within a given landscape, we used the outcome of logistic regression as an input into a cellular automata model (CA model), which simulates fire spread in a 2D grid. The CA was model calibrated on three fires that occurred between 2016 and 2022, then verified on six 2023 fires and featured a mean sensitivity of 0.74 and specificity of 0.79. The logistic regression model had an accuracy of 54 %, showing increased fire susceptibility from high Scots pine volume ( p -value = 0.02), and decreased fire susceptibility from high volumes of deciduous trees and wet soil. Realistic outcomes of the CA model and reliance of our approach on publicly available data with nation-wide coverage of vegetation cover in Sweden allows for the development of an automated protocol of fire susceptibility assessment at the operational level and its integration in existing decision support systems. This would allow forest owners to obtain estimates of forest fire susceptibility for different forest management strategies.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ModellingSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207