MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416220864 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2025-0035

Mapping and development of 30 m landscape fuel data for Ukraine

2025· article· en· W4416220864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dmytro Oshurok, Dmytro Grabovets, Olena Turos, Daniil Boldyriev, Arina Petrosian, Bohdan Molodets, Tetiana Maremukha, Yehor Zahnii, Tetiana Bulana, Varvara Morhulova, Oleg Skrynyk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJoint Research CentreEuropean CommissionAmazon Web Services
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Biomass (ecology)Distribution (mathematics)Emission inventoryProduct (mathematics)Consistency (knowledge bases)Dispersion (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an ∼30 m gridded dataset of landscape fuel parameters for Ukraine, compiled from global satellite-derived vegetation data as well as information from catalogues on existing biotopes and species diversity in Ukraine, and from other literature sources. The data have been structured into 80 fuelbeds according to the Fuel Characteristic Classification System. For direct validation of the developed data, we compared above-ground biomass (AGB) with similar data from European Space Agency (ESA) Climate Change Initiative (CCI), as well as AGB and fuel loading parameters with the 300 m global fuel dataset. Indirect validation involved modelling, the dispersion of pollutants (CO, PM2.5, and PM10) from wildfires in the Kyiv region on 23 March 2022. The comparison showed good agreement between AGB for mature forests and the ESA CCI data, and an overall consistency between the created product for Ukraine and the global fuel map. However, substantial differences in the distribution of fuel characteristics were obtained for the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone, which might be explained by different approaches to fuel parameterization. Pollutant concentrations were predicted with acceptable accuracy taking into account the large uncertainties in fire time localization. This fine-resolution digital product has great potential for various applications, including the assessment of the war-induced environmental impact.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→