MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410934669 · doi:10.5194/essd-17-2249-2025

Distribution and characteristics of lightning-ignited wildfires in boreal forests – the BoLtFire database

2025· article· en· W4410934669 on OpenAlexaff
Brittany Engle, Ivan Bratoev, Morgan A. Crowley, Yanan Zhu, Cornelius Senf

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth system science data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsLightning (connector)TaigaEnvironmental scienceBorealDistribution (mathematics)MeteorologyDatabaseClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyGeographyComputer scienceArchaeologyForestryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The frequency and severity of fire weather have been projected to increase under climate change, particularly in high-latitude boreal forests. Lightning, a key ignition source globally, is also expected to become more frequent with climate change and could significantly increase burn area. Current research on lightning-ignited wildfire (LIWs) has a long history in boreal ecosystems but has typically focused on North America due to better data availability, while the lack of publicly available data for Eurasia has hindered our comprehensive understanding of important characteristics of LIWs, such as holdover time, lightning ignition efficiency, frequency, and spatial distribution in boreal forests. This study introduces the temporal minimum distance (TMin) method, a novel approach to matching lightning strikes with wildfires without requiring ignition location that outperformed current methodologies. As a result, we developed a comprehensive dataset of lightning-ignited wildfires across the entire boreal forest from 2012 to 2022, encompassing 6902 fires, 4201 in Eurasia and 2701 in North America, each over 200 ha in size. This dataset (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14940326, Engle et al., 2024) provides new opportunities to model the ignition and spread dynamics of boreal wildfires and offers deeper insights into lightning-driven fire activity globally.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth system science dataSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207