MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7061343661

Reinforcement Learning for Determining Spread Dynamics of Spatially Spreading Processes with Emphasis on Forest Fires

2018· dissertation· en· W7061343661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Domain (mathematical analysis)Function (biology)Markov decision processMarkov processMarkov chain
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning algorithms have increased tremendously in power in recent years but have yet to be fully utilized in many ecology and sustainable resource management domains such as wildlife reserve design, forest fire management and invasive species spread. One thing these domains have in common is that they contain dynamics that can be characterized as a Spatially Spreading Process (SSP) which requires many parameters to be set precisely to model the dynamics, spread rates and directional biases of the elements which are spreading. \n \nWe introduce a novel approach for learning in SSP domains such as wild fires using Reinforcement Learning (RL) where fire is the agent at any cell in the landscape and the set of actions the fire can take from a location at any point in time includes spreading into any point in the 3 $\\times$ 3 grid around it (including not spreading). \n \nThis approach inverts the usual RL setup since the dynamics of the corresponding Markov Decision Process (MDP) is a known function for immediate wildfire spread. Meanwhile, we learn an agent policy for a predictive model of the dynamics of a complex spatially-spreading process. Rewards are provided for correctly classifying which cells are on fire or not compared to satellite and other related data. \n \nWe use 3 demonstrative domains to prove the ability of our approach. The first one is a popular online simulator of a wildfire, the second domain involves a pair of forest fires in Northern Alberta which are the Fort McMurray fire of 2016 that led to an unprecedented evacuation of almost 90,000 people and the Richardson fire of 2011, and the third domain deals with historical Saskatchewan fires previously compared by others to a physics-based simulator. \n \nThe standard RL algorithms considered on all the domains include Monte Carlo Tree Search, Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C), Deep Q Learning (DQN) and Deep Q Learning with prioritized experience replay. We also introduce a novel combination of Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) and A3C algorithms that shows the best performance across different test domains and testing environments. Additionally, some other algorithms like Value Iteration, Policy Iteration and Q-Learning are applied on the Alberta fires testing domain to show the performances of these simple model based and model free approaches. We also compare to a Gaussian process based supervised learning approach and discuss relation to state-of-the-art methods from forest wildfire modelling. \n \nThe results show that we can learn predictive, agent-based policies as models of spatial dynamics using RL on readily available datasets like satellite images which are at least as good as other methods and have many additional advantages in terms of generalizability and interpretability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→