MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406908679 · doi:10.3390/s25030792

Spatio-Temporal Agnostic Sampling for Imbalanced Multivariate Seasonal Time Series Data: A Study on Forest Fires

2025· article· en· W4406908679 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdul Mutakabbir, Chung–Horng Lung, Kshirasagar Naik, Marzia Zaman, Samuel A. Ajila, Thambirajah Ravichandran, Richard Purcell, Srinivas Sampalli

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCistel Technology (Canada)University of WaterlooCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooDalhousie University
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsRobustness (evolution)Sampling (signal processing)Computer scienceTime seriesRegressionData miningEnvironmental scienceStatisticsEcologyMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural disasters are mostly seasonal and caused by anthropological, climatic, and geological factors that impact human life, economy, ecology, and natural resources. This paper focuses on increasingly widespread forest fires, causing greater destruction in recent years. Data obtained from sensors for predicting forest fires and assessing fire severity, i.e., area burned, are multivariate, seasonal, and highly imbalanced with a ratio of 100,000+ non-fire events to 1 fire event. This paper presents Spatio-Temporal Agnostic Sampling (STAS) to overcome the challenge of highly imbalanced data. This paper first presents a mathematical understanding of fire and non-fire events and then a thorough complexity analysis of the proposed STAS framework and two existing methods, NearMiss and SMOTE. Further, to investigate the applicability of STAS, binary classification models (to determine the probability of forest fire) and regression models (to assess the severity of forest fire) were built on the data generated from STAS. A total of 432 experiments were conducted to validate the robustness of the STAS parameters. Additional experiments with a temporal data split were conducted to further validate the results. The results show that 180 of the 216 binary classification models had an F1score>0.9 and 150 of the 216 regression models had an R2score>0.75. These results indicate the applicability of STAS for fire prediction with highly imbalanced multivariate seasonal time series data.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensors→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→