MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7126025787 · doi:10.48547/202601-003

Fuel Moisture Model Calibration under Natural Hazard Conditions: A Case Study in Andean Cypress-Coihue Mixed Forests, Northwestern Patagonia

2025· article· en· W7126025787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Torben Hammer

Bibliographic record

VenueHAWK.eDOC · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemperate climateTemperate rainforestCanopyRelative humidityCalibrationMoistureWater contentTemperate forest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent decades have seen a marked intensification of wildfire regimes worldwide, posing increasing risks to temperate forests. In northwestern Patagonia, Argentina, these changes threaten biodiversity-rich Andean foothill forests dominated by Austrocedrus chilensis and Nothofagus dombeyi. Yet, most operational fuel moisture models, such as those embedded in the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System, remain calibrated for Northern Hemisphere conditions and may not accurately reflect the microclimatic variability of Patagonian mountain forests. This study develops and validates a site-specific calibration of 10-hour fuel moisture models under natural hazard conditions in the El Manso Valley, Río Negro Province. Field-based gravimetric measurements were combined with automated reference-stick data to examine diurnal dynamics of fuel moisture content (FMC) across contrasting canopy types. Linear calibration models were established to quantify relationships between stand-level FMC, local relative humidity, and standardized reference-stick readings. Results demonstrate pronounced species-specific differences: in the open Austrocedrus stand, FMC showed moderate correlation with relative humidity (R² = 0.330), indicating short- term atmospheric coupling. In contrast, Nothofagus fuels exhibited almost invariant moisture conditions (R² ≈ 0.003) due to canopy buffering and reduced air exchange. Standard models such as the Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC) and reference-stick calibrations consistently overpredicted drying rates under shaded and mesic conditions. These findings highlight the need for regionally adapted calibration schemes that incorporate canopy structure and microclimatic controls. The study provides an empirical basis for improving the accuracy of fire danger rating systems in southern temperate forests and contributes to a broader understanding of fuel–climate interactions under increasing wildfire risk.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAWK.eDOC→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→