Fire spread predictions: Sweeping uncertainty under the rug
Science of The Total Environment, ISSN: 0048-9697, Vol: 592, Page: 187-196
2017
- 31Citations
- 96Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations31
- Citation Indexes31
- 31
- CrossRef29
- Captures96
- Readers96
- 96
Article Description
Predicting fire spread and behavior correctly is crucial to minimize the dramatic consequences of wildfires. However, our capability of accurately predicting fire spread is still very limited, undermining the utility of such simulations to support decision-making. Improving fire spread predictions for fire management purposes, by using higher quality input data or enhanced models, can be expensive, unfeasible or even impossible. Fire managers would benefit from fast and inexpensive ways of improving their decision-making. In the present work, we focus on i) understanding if fire spread predictions can be improved through model parameter calibration based on information collected from a set of large historical wildfires in Portugal; and ii) understanding to what extent decreasing parametric uncertainty can counterbalance the impact of input data uncertainty. Our results obtained with the Fire Area Simulator (FARSITE) modeling system show that fire spread predictions can be continuously improved by ‘learning’ from past wildfires. The uncertainty contained in the major input variables (wind speed and direction, ignition location and fuel models) can be ‘swept under the rug’ through the use of more appropriate parameter sets. The proposed framework has a large potential to improve future fire spread predictions, increasing their reliability and usefulness to support fire management and decision making processes, thus potentially reducing the negative impacts of wildfires.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969717306186; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.106; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85015316610&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28319706; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0048969717306186; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.106
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know