A review of accidental residential fire death investigations in Alberta 2012–2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Residential fires continue to be a significant safety concern, especially as the majority are preventable. This study investigated 139 accidental residential fire deaths in Alberta between 2012 and 2021 to identify key characteristics and risk factors. The findings generally reinforce previous research on fatal accidental residential fires indicating that more deaths occurred amongst males (60.4%) than females (39.6%); seniors (65 and older) were found to be a high risk group; the majority of the fatal fires occurred in small population centres and rural areas (51.8%); alcohol consumption was prevalent among a large proportion of the decedents (46.7%); smoke inhalation was the leading cause of death (57.6%); a sizable number of fires occurred in the winter season (35.3%); a notable number of fires occurred during the 12am-6am time period (44.6%); and smoking material was the leading source of ignition in these residential fires (23%). The assessment of area-based deprivation in relation to fatal residential fires revealed that fatal fires were more frequent in communities with higher situational vulnerability and economic dependency.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".