MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412447433 · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2025.103498

Bridging spatiotemporal wildfire prediction and decision modeling using transformer networks and fuzzy inference systems

2025· article· en· W4412447433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Parul Dubey

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodsX · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)InferenceFuzzy inference systemTransformerFuzzy inferenceComputer scienceFuzzy logicData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemEngineeringFuzzy control system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildfires present a growing threat to ecosystems, human settlements, and climate stability, necessitating accurate and interpreted prediction systems. Existing AI-based models often prioritize performance over explainability, limiting their utility in real-time decision-making contexts. Current wildfire forecasting models struggle to incorporate uncertainty and offer transparent response strategies. Moreover, many models fail to integrate domain knowledge in a way that supports actionable interventions. This study utilizes the Canadian Fire Spread Dataset, augmented with Sentinel, ERA5, and SRTM data, encompassing vegetation, meteorological, and topographic variables. The suggested system uses a Transformer-based model to predict fires over time and space, along with a Fuzzy Rule-Based System (FRBS) to create rules for responding to those predictions. This integration allows for both high accuracy and interpretability in decision-making under uncertain environmental conditions. The novelty lies in the use of symbolic fuzzy reasoning layered onto a deep attention-based architecture. Performance was evaluated using metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and AUC. The model achieved an F1-score of 92.9 % and accuracy of 94.8 %, significantly outperforming baseline and deep learning alternatives. • Integrates deep learning with fuzzy logic for both accurate forecasting and interpretable response planning. • Enables uncertainty-aware reasoning by translating predictions into actionable fire management rules. • Demonstrates superior performance across diverse environmental datasets using multi-source satellite and climate inputs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodsXSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207