MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A comparative analysis of fire-weather indices for enhanced fire activity prediction with probabilistic approaches

2024· article· en· W4404801349 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Castel-Clavera, François Pimont, Thomas Opitz, Julien Ruffault, Renaud Barbero, Denis Allard, Jean‐Luc Dupuy

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Forest Meteorology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyBiometeorologyProbabilistic logicClimatologyComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Relying on fire-weather indices is insufficient for proper prediction of fire danger. • Spatio-temporal effects are necessary to improve the performance of fire indices. • We used a probabilistic Bayesian framework where fires are a marked point process. • The Canadian FWI remains the most skillful indicator among the tested indices. • The most skillful model includes DC, DMC, FFMC, VPD (or Tmax) and Wind-speed. Weather conditions play a crucial role in driving fire activity in Mediterranean France. Previous research has demonstrated the influence of these conditions on the likelihood of large fire events over the world. However, certain limitations persist regarding the representation of fire weather in probabilistic models. The objective of this paper is to develop an efficient method to rate fire danger by identifying the best representation of weather data for fire activity prediction in Mediterranean France. We evaluated the performance of meteorological variables and the most common fire-weather indices (FWIs) worldwide as predictors of fire occurrence and size using the Firelihood framework, a probabilistic Bayesian model of fire activity. These models were compared to a fire activity baseline model incorporating only spatial and temporal effects but no explicit fire-weather information to allow for an in-depth study of information not captured by fire-weather indices. The results indicate that relying solely on fire-weather indices is insufficient for efficient rating of fire activities. The inclusion of spatial and seasonal effects in the models is crucial for improving the indices' performance. While the Canadian FWI remains the most skillful indicator among the tested indices, using new combinations of several of its subcomponents further increases accuracy. Various performance analyses, including threshold selections, were carried out to comparatively assess those improvements. The approach shows that probabilistic models informed with appropriately constructed fire-weather indices substantially improve various aspects of fire activity predictions in the Mediterranean area.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Forest MeteorologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207