MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408427497 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-11763

A Probabilistic Wildfire Risk Model for Canada: Insights for Data, Science and Policy

2025· preprint· en· W4408427497 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jamie Sandison

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesMandateNatural disasterWork (physics)Environmental planningPublic healthBusinessPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeographyMeteorologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildfires are increasing in intensity globally, causing death, displacement, elevated health risks due to smoke inhalation, and billions of dollars in damages. In Canada, wildfires are the costliest disaster by event occurrence and recent fires have had international impacts, including on air quality in the United States. These direct consequences of intense wildfires, in addition to the impacts on financial and insurance markets, necessitates a comprehensive and science-based understanding of wildfire risk. This presentation will provide an overview of the wildfire risk in Canada and discuss the innovative scientific approach to risk modelling. In Canada, single wildfire events have caused billions of dollars of losses to residents, governments, and insurers along with considerable social and health impacts, including community displacement and smoke inhalation. The record-breaking 2023 fire season demonstrated that all of Canada can be affected by wildfires, and the intensity of recent wildfires internationally, including in the United States, illustrate the urgent need to better understand intense wildfires. In Canada, Public Safety Canada’s (PS’s) mandate is to “keep Canada safe from a range of risks such as natural disasters”. The Data Science and Engineering Team at Public Safety connects data, analysis, and engineering to policy development, to work towards meeting this ambitious mandate and to support effective adaptation. The team is imbedded in a policy directorate and provides data analysis and technical policy input for programs including a federally-backed Insurance Program, Disaster Financial Assistance modernization, and creating and sharing Canada-wide risk ratings for natural hazards, including wildfires. Canada has significant wildfire risk across much of the country. Many small and medium settlement areas are directly exposed to wildfire risk, and the past few years have seen unprecedented destruction throughout the country. Canada’s extensive forests as well as our dispersed and often remote settlement patterns create a unique and problematic landscape of wildfire risk that will be discussed in the presentation. Several recent wildfire events have led to insurer losses well beyond the historical maximum of losses for any year over the last 50 years. In Canada and across the world, insurers have begun to reduce their risk exposure for high risk properties by refusing policy renewals, reducing capacity to write policies, and raising premiums. PS is responsible for building a holistic understanding of natural hazards across Canada. In this presentation, we will share our team’s and scientific collaborator’s novel efforts across three federal departments to fill knowledge gaps and perform a ‘first of its kind’ wildfire impact assessment and quantification for residential structures in Canada. This includes progress developing and validating novel approaches for characterizing and communicating probabilistic wildfire hazard, developing a Canada-wide wildfire risk assessment, quantifying house loss to structures, and providing wildfire risk information for Canada-wide financial risk analysis. We will highlight our efforts towards data-informed, aligned and effective adaptation policy in addition to how we are bridging the gap between data, science, and policy to keep Canadians safe.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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