Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Current fire modules vastly underestimate variance in annual area burned #6

Open
SteveCumming opened this issue Oct 10, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@SteveCumming
Copy link
Collaborator

See my poster from the JSM August 2018; I should give a lab meeting talk on this. Deets to follow

@achubaty
Copy link
Collaborator

any followup on this?

@achubaty
Copy link
Collaborator

achubaty commented Dec 2, 2022

@SteveCumming is this something you want to come to and discuss within the next few months?

@SteveCumming
Copy link
Collaborator Author

SteveCumming commented Dec 2, 2022

sure, I could do that. It remains a preoccupation of mine...and a 1st-approximation solution is almost in my grasp.

One thing we could do easily (if you and Ian are still working on the scfm code) is to estimate the variances of:

  1. the sizes of the sample of escaped fires used to parameterize scfm and
  2. the sizes of the escaped simulated fires

and compare them. I expect that [1] >> [2], but let's find out.

@SteveCumming
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Further to this, here's a possible solution:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aba101/meta

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants