Driving Factors and Future Trends of Wildfires in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Departures from historical wildfire regimes due to climate change have significant implications for the structure and composition of forests, as well as for fire management and operations in the Alberta region of Canada. This study analyzed the relationship between climate and wildfire and used a random forest algorithm to predict future wildfire frequencies in Alberta, Canada. Key factors driving wildfires were identified as vapor pressure deficit (VPD), sea surface temperature (SST), maximum temperature (Tmax), and the self-calibrated Palmer drought severity index (scPDSI). Projections indicate an increase in wildfire frequencies from 918 per year during 1970–1999 to 1151 per year during 2040–2069 under a moderate greenhouse gas (GHG) emission scenario (RCP 4.5) and to 1258 per year under a high GHG emission scenario (RCP 8.5). By 2070–2099, wildfire frequencies are projected to increase to 1199 per year under RCP 4.5 and to 1555 per year under RCP 8.5. The peak number of wildfires is expected to shift from May to July. These findings suggest that projected GHG emissions will substantially increase wildfire danger in Alberta by 2099, posing increasing challenges for fire suppression efforts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".