MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6963750872 · doi:10.18739/a2542jb0z

Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE): Burned Area, Depth, and Combustion for Alaska and Canada, 2001-2019

2022· dataset· en· W6963750872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCalifornia Digital Library · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorealTaigaFire regimeCombustionCarbon cycleHydrology (agriculture)EcosystemVulnerability (computing)Prescribed burn

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset provides annual gridded estimates of fire locations and associated burn fraction per pixel for Alaska and Canada at approximately 500 meter (m) spatial resolution for the period 2001-2019. Gridded predictions of carbon combustion and burn depth for the same period within the Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) extended domain using the burn area maps and field data are also available. Fire locations and date of burn (DOB) were detected by MODIS-derived active fire products. Burned area was primarily estimated from finer-scale Landsat imagery using a differenced Normalized Burn Ratio (dNBR) algorithm and upscaled to an approximate 500 m MODIS resolution. Aboveground combustion, belowground combustion, and burn depth were statistically modeled at the pixel level for every mapped burned pixel in the ABoVE extended domain based on field observations across Alaska and western Canada. Predictor variables included remotely sensed indicators of fire severity, topography, soils, climate, and fire weather. Quality flags for burned area and combustion are available. Fire is the dominant disturbance agent in Alaskan and Canadian boreal ecosystems and releases large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. These data are useful for studies of disturbance, fire ecology, and carbon cycling in boreal ecosystems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCalifornia Digital LibrarySame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207