CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 129

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An empirical machine learning method for predicting potential fire control locations for pre-fire planning and operational fire management

Connor, Christopher D. O’, Calkin, David E., Thompson, Matthew P.·2017·International Journal of Wildland Fire
DOI 10.1071/wf16135
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

During active fire incidents, decisions regarding where and how to safely and effectively deploy resources to meet management objectives are often made under rapidly evolving conditions, with limited time to assess management strategies or for development of backup plans if initial efforts prove unsuccessful. Under all but the most extreme fire weather conditions, topography and fuels are significant factors affecting potential fire spread and burn severity. We leverage these relationships to quantify the effects of topography, fuel characteristics, road networks and fire suppression effort on the perimeter locations of 238 large fires, and develop a predictive model of potential fire control locations spanning a range of fuel types, topographic features and natural and anthropogenic barriers to fire spread, on a 34 000 km2 landscape in southern Idaho and northern Nevada. The boosted logistic regression model correctly classified final fire perimeter locations on an independent dataset with 69% accuracy without consideration of weather conditions on individual fires. The resulting fire control probability surface has potential for reducing unnecessary exposure for fire responders, coordinating pre-fire planning for operational fire response, and as a network of locations to incorporate into spatial fire planning to better align fire operations with land management objectives.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/wf16135

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Planning for a future where watershed response to wildfire are highly non-stationary will be challenging.

    “Planning for a future where watershed response to wildfire are highly non‐stationary will be challenging (O'Connor et al., 2017).”

    From Scientists' warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply (2021) · cites this paper as O'Connor et al., 2017

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Abatzoglou, 2016, Impact of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire across western US forests., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113, 11770, 10.1073/PNAS.1607171113 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Anderson, 1989, A mathematical model for fire containment., Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 19, 997, 10.1139/X89-153 · DOI
  3. Beier, 2010, Use of land facets to plan for climate change: conserving the arenas, not the actors., Conservation Biology, 24, 701, 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2009.01422.X · DOI
  4. Calkin, 2011, A real-time risk assessment tool supporting wildland fire decision making., Journal of Forestry, 109, 274, 10.1093/jof/109.5.274 · DOI · Paper page
  5. De’ath, 2007, Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction., Ecology, 88, 243, 10.1890/0012-9658(2007)88[243:BTFEMA]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Dillon, 2011, Mapping the potential for high severity wildfire in the western United States., Fire Management Today, 71, 25
  7. Dillon, 2011, Both topography and climate affected forest and woodland burn severity in two regions of the western US, 1984 to 2006., Ecosphere, 2, 130, 10.1890/ES11-00271.1 · DOI
  8. Dormann, 2013, Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance., Ecography, 36, 27, 10.1111/J.1600-0587.2012.07348.X · DOI · Paper page
  9. Duff, 2015, Operational wildfire suppression modelling: a review evaluating development, state of the art and future directions., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24, 735, 10.1071/WF15018 · DOI
  10. Dunn, A framework for developing safe and efficient large-fire incident response strategies and tactics for a new fire management paradigm., International Journal of Wildland Fire
  11. Elith, 2008, A working guide to boosted regression trees., Journal of Animal Ecology, 77, 802, 10.1111/J.1365-2656.2008.01390.X · DOI · Paper page
  12. Elith, 2011, A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists., Diversity & Distributions, 17, 43, 10.1111/J.1472-4642.2010.00725.X · DOI · Paper page
  13. Finney, 2009, Modeling containment of large wildfires using generalized linear mixed-model analysis., Forest Science, 55, 249, 10.1093/forestscience/55.3.249 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Finney, 2011, A method for ensemble wildland fire simulation., Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 16, 153, 10.1007/S10666-010-9241-3 · DOI
  15. Finney, 2011, A simulation of probabilistic wildfire risk components for the continental United States., Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 25, 973, 10.1007/S00477-011-0462-Z · DOI
  16. Fried, 1996, Simulating wildfire containment with realistic tactics., Forest Science, 42, 267, 10.1093/forestscience/42.3.267 · DOI
  17. Friedman, 2000, Additive logistic regression: a statistical view of boosting (with discussion and a rejoinder by the authors)., Annals of Statistics, 28, 337, 10.1214/AOS/1016218223 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Haas, 2013, A national approach for integrating wildfire simulation modeling into wildland–urban interface risk assessments within the United States., Landscape and Urban Planning, 119, 44, 10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2013.06.011 · DOI
  19. Harris, 2015, Topography, fuels, and fire exclusion drive fire severity of the Rim Fire in an old-growth mixed-conifer forest, Yosemite National Park, USA., Ecosystems, 18, 1192, 10.1007/S10021-015-9890-9 · DOI
  20. Holsinger, 2016, Weather, fuels, and topography impede wildland fire spread in western US landscapes., Forest Ecology and Management, 380, 59, 10.1016/J.FORECO.2016.08.035 · DOI
  21. Iniguez, 2008, Topography affected landscape fire history patterns in southern Arizona, USA., Forest Ecology and Management, 256, 295, 10.1016/J.FORECO.2008.04.023 · DOI
  22. Kane, 2015, Mixed severity fire effects within the Rim Fire: relative importance of local climate, fire weather, topography, and forest structure., Forest Ecology and Management, 358, 62, 10.1016/J.FORECO.2015.09.001 · DOI
  23. Lobo, 2008, AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models., Global Ecology and Biogeography, 17, 145, 10.1111/J.1466-8238.2007.00358.X · DOI · Paper page
  24. Margolis, 2009, Fire history and fire–climate relationships along a fire regime gradient in the Santa Fe Municipal Watershed, NM, USA., Forest Ecology and Management, 258, 2416, 10.1016/J.FORECO.2009.08.019 · DOI
  25. Merow, 2013, A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter., Ecography, 36, 1058, 10.1111/J.1600-0587.2013.07872.X · DOI · Paper page
  26. Merow, 2014, What do we gain from simplicity versus complexity in species distribution models?, Ecography, 37, 1267, 10.1111/ECOG.00845 · DOI
  27. Mitsopoulos, 2016, An integrated approach for mapping fire suppression difficulty in three different ecosystems of Eastern Europe., Journal of Spatial Science, 10.1080/14498596.2016.1169952 · DOI
  28. Narayanaraj, 2011, Influences of forest roads on the spatial pattern of wildfire boundaries., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 20, 792, 10.1071/WF10032 · DOI
  29. Narayanaraj, 2012, Influences of forest roads on the spatial patterns of human- and lightning-caused wildfire ignitions., Applied Geography (Sevenoaks, England), 32, 878, 10.1016/J.APGEOG.2011.09.004 · DOI
  30. Noonan-Wright, 2011, Developing the US wildland fire decision support system., Journal of Combustion, 2011, 168473, 10.1155/2011/168473 · DOI
  31. O’Connor, 2014, Fire severity, size, and climate associations diverge from historical precedent along an ecological gradient in the Pinaleño Mountains, Arizona, USA., Forest Ecology and Management, 329, 264, 10.1016/J.FORECO.2014.06.032 · DOI
  32. Parks, 2012, Spatial bottom-up controls on fire likelihood vary across western North America., Ecosphere, 3, 12, 10.1890/ES11-00298.1 · DOI
  33. Parks, 2014, Fire activity and severity in the western US vary along proxy gradients representing fuel amount and fuel moisture., PLoS One, 9, e99699, 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0099699 · DOI
  34. Petrovic, 2012, A decision-making framework for wildfire suppression., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 21, 927, 10.1071/WF11140 · DOI
  35. Phillips, 2006, Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions., Ecological Modelling, 190, 231, 10.1016/J.ECOLMODEL.2005.03.026 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Podur, 2007, A simulation model of the growth and suppression of large forest fires in Ontario., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 16, 285, 10.1071/WF06107 · DOI
  37. Preisler, 2004, Probability based models for estimation of wildfire risk., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 13, 133, 10.1071/WF02061 · DOI
  38. Price, 2014, Role of weather and fuel in stopping fire spread in tropical savannas., Austral Ecology, 39, 135, 10.1111/AEC.12021 · DOI
  39. Riley, 2013, The relationship of large fire occurrence with drought and fire danger indices in the western USA, 1984–2008: the role of temporal scale., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 22, 894, 10.1071/WF12149 · DOI
  40. Rodríguez y Silva, 2014, A methodology for determining operational priorities for prevention and suppression of wildland fires., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 23, 544, 10.1071/WF13063 · DOI
  41. Short, 2015, Sources and implications of bias and uncertainty in a century of US wildfire activity data., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24, 883, 10.1071/WF14190 · DOI
  42. Thompson, 2013, Developing standardized strategic response categories for fire management units., Fire Management Today, 73, 18
  43. Thompson, 2015, Development and application of a geospatial wildfire exposure and risk calculation tool., Environmental Modelling & Software, 63, 61, 10.1016/J.ENVSOFT.2014.09.018 · DOI
  44. Thompson, 2016, Application of wildfire risk assessment results to wildfire response planning in the Southern Sierra Nevada, California, USA., Forests, 7, 64, 10.3390/F7030064 · DOI
  45. Thompson, 2016, Quantifying the influence of previously burned areas on suppression effectiveness and avoided exposure: a case study of the Las Conchas Fire., International Journal of Wildland Fire, 25, 167, 10.1071/WF14216 · DOI
  46. Ward, 2009, Presence-only data and the EM algorithm., Biometrics, 65, 554, 10.1111/J.1541-0420.2008.01116.X · DOI
  47. Wu, 2013, Determining relative contributions of vegetation and topography to burn severity from LANDSAT imagery., Environmental Management, 52, 821, 10.1007/S00267-013-0128-3 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Connor, C. D. O., Calkin, D. E., & Thompson, M. P.
Affiliations
AUS Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 800 East Beckwith Avenue, Missoula, MT 59801, USA.
Venue
International Journal of Wildland Fire
Publisher
CSIRO Publishing
Published
2017-02-13
Volume
26
Issue
7
Pages
587-597
ISSN
  • 1049-8001
  • 1448-5516
DOI
10.1071/wf16135
Cited by
129
References
2
Language
en
Licence
doi.org/10.1071/journalslicense (vor, 3108 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review