Paper detail

Point process modeling of wildfire hazard in Los Angeles County, California

The Burning Index (BI) produced daily by the United States government's National Fire Danger Rating System is commonly used in forecasting the hazard of wildfire activity in the United States. However, recent evaluations have shown the BI to be less effective at predicting wildfires in Los Angeles County, compared to simple point process models incorporating similar meteorological information. Here, we explore the forecasting power of a suite of more complex point process models that use seasonal wildfire trends, daily and lagged weather variables, and historical spatial burn patterns as covariates, and that interpolate the records from different weather stations. Results are compared with models using only the BI. The performance of each model is compared by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), as well as by the power in predicting wildfires in the historical data set and residual analysis. We find that multiplicative models that directly use weather variables offer substantial improvement in fit compared to models using only the BI, and, in particular, models where a distinct spatial bandwidth parameter is estimated for each weather station appear to offer substantially improved fit.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.