MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7103203872

Advancing Forest Fires Classification using Neurochaos Learning

2025· article· W7103203872 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicFire Detection and Safety Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAmrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University
KeywordsRandomnessRandom forestTraining (meteorology)Artificial neural networkChaoticDeep learningTraining set
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fires are among the most dangerous and unpredictable natural disasters worldwide. Forest fire can be instigated by natural causes or by humans. They are devastating overall, and thus, many research efforts have been carried out to predict whether a fire can occur in an area given certain environmental variables. Many research works employ Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) models for classification; however, their accuracy is merely adequate and falls short of expectations. This limit arises because these models are unable to depict the underlying nonlinearity in nature and extensively rely on substantial training data, which is hard to obtain. We propose using Neurochaos Learning (NL), a chaos-based, brain-inspired learning algorithm for forest fire classification. Like our brains, NL needs less data to learn nonlinear patterns in the training data. It employs one-dimensional chaotic maps, namely the Generalized Lüroth Series (GLS), as neurons. NL yields comparable performance with ML and DL models, sometimes even surpassing them, particularly in low-sample training regimes, and unlike deep neural networks, NL is interpretable as it preserves causal structures in the data. Random Heterogenous Neurochaos Learning (RHNL), a type of NL where different chaotic neurons are randomnly located to mimic the randomness and heterogeneity of human brain gives the best F1 score of 1.0 for the Algerian Forest Fires Dataset. Compared to other traditional ML classifiers considered, RHNL also gives high precision score of 0.90 for Canadian Forest Fires Dataset and 0.68 for Portugal Forest Fires Dataset. The results obtained from this work indicate that Neurochaos Learning (NL) architectures achieve better performance than conventional machine learning classifiers, highlighting their promise for developing more efficient and reliable forest fire detection systems.

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.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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