MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multimodal Classification on User-generated Content During Wildfires in Canada

2025· preprint· en· W4407450612 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Braeden Sherritt, Isar Nejadgholi, Marzieh Amini

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsContent (measure theory)User-generated contentComputer scienceInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebMathematicsSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to swiftly and efficiently assess information is essential for a successful response in the case of a natural disaster, such as wildfires. Access to accurate and timely information is critical for first responders and the public to make informed decisions within tight timelines. Although traditional sources of information such as satellite images, field surveys, and contact centers are costly and time consuming, social media content is more affordable and immediately available, making it a useful tool for real-time updates. However, extracting insights from the abundance of user-generated content on social media can be challenging. Machine learning can automatically categorize posts, filter noise and highlight crucial information for responders and the public. In this work, we introduce, WildFireCan-MMD, a new multimodal dataset tailored to Canadian wildfires, collected from user-generated posts on X during the 2022, 2023, and 2024 British Columbia and Alberta wildfires. We applied topic clustering followed by manual annotation to label this dataset into thirteen wildfire-relevant themes. We tested two Generative Large Vision-Language Models (GLVLMs), namely, gpt-4o-mini and open-source LLaVA, for the classification of WildFireCan-MMD in zero-shot setting. We also developed custom classifiers, including RoBERTa and ViT transformer combinations with early and late fusion. Our results show that if no training data is available, gpt-4o-mini might serve as a practical zero-shot classifier. However, with labeled training data, even a basic Gaussian Naive Bayes classifier outperforms gpt-4o-mini. Fine-tuned transformers outperform gpt-4o-mini by a large margin of 23%. This study underscores the value of curated, task-specific datasets and training customized classifiers despite recent advancements in zero-shot GLVLMs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207