Record-breaking persistent high-pressure systems fueled unprecedented Canadian wildfire disasters in 2023
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Canada experienced its most severe wildfire season on record in 2023, with nearly 5% of its forested land burned-almost four times the previous record set in 1995. Our analysis indicated that fire severity, strongly correlated with the monthly Fire Weather Index (FWI), was most intense in the western provinces and territories during May and July, whereas in the eastern provinces, it peaked in June, leading to a seasonal and areal average of more than 3.5 standard deviations (STD). This unprecedented fire activity was fueled by record-breaking, persistent high-pressure systems, with both their frequency and intensities surpassing 3 STD, along with variable winds. These abnormal atmospheric patterns exacerbated dry conditions, reduced cloud cover, and increased surface solar radiation, driving record-high temperatures and FWI values, all exceeding ±3 STD. The extreme high-pressure events were primarily linked to a combination of climatological standing waves and exceptionally strong, transient quasi-stationary waves. The dominant patterns in the mid-troposphere were characterized by large-scale planetary waves at low zonal wavenumbers (1–4). Long-term warming trends also contributed, though they played a lesser role, accounting for roughly 10–20% of the overall anomalies. These findings provide critical insights into the atmospheric dynamics driving Canada’s unprecedented wildfire season.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".