MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416171589 · doi:10.3390/fire8110441

Using Air Quality Alerts to Estimate Population-Based Wildfire Smoke Exposure from the 2023 Canadian Wildfire Season

2025· article· en· W4416171589 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carlyn J. Matz, Morgan W. Mitchell, Céline Audette

Bibliographic record

VenueFire · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsSmokeAir quality indexPopulationAir pollutionRisk assessmentMetric (unit)Exacerbation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildfires are a source of air pollution, which impacts air quality in proximity to and at great distances from fires. Wildfire smoke exposure is seasonal and episodic, with exposure levels and durations that can vary considerably. Exposure to wildfire smoke is associated with numerous health effects, including an increased risk of mortality and exacerbation of respiratory diseases. In Canada, the health risks of wildfire smoke are communicated to the public via air quality (AQ) alerts, when levels of wildfire smoke are currently or are forecasted to be relatively high, posing a risk to the general population. To better understand the population at risk due to wildfire smoke, a population-based exposure metric was developed based on geolocated AQ alerts and population data. This metric, measured in person-days, quantifies the number of people at risk of experiencing adverse health effects of wildfire smoke during a given time period. Data from the 2023 wildfire season were used to evaluate the metric. The greatest numbers of person-days were associated with population centres and regions that experienced periods of prolonged, intense smoke exposure. For example, Toronto, a large population centre, had 12 days with AQ alerts issued, corresponding to 33.5 M person-days. This approach could be expanded to other environmental or extreme weather conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFireSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207