Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2212.01796

Insights into the drivers and spatio-temporal trends of extreme Mediterranean wildfires with statistical deep-learning

Jordan Richards·Raphaël Huser·Emanuele Bevacqua·Jakob Zscheischler
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Extreme wildfires are a significant cause of human death and biodiversity destruction within countries that encompass the Mediterranean Basin. Recent worrying trends in wildfire activity (i.e., occurrence and spread) suggest that wildfires are likely to be highly impacted by climate change. In order to facilitate appropriate risk mitigation, we must identify the main drivers of extreme wildfires and assess their spatio-temporal trends, with a view to understanding the impacts of global warming on fire activity. We analyse the monthly burnt area due to wildfires over a region encompassing most of Europe and the Mediterranean Basin from 2001 to 2020, and identify high fire activity during this period in Algeria, Italy and Portugal. We build an extreme quantile regression model with a high-dimensional predictor set describing meteorological conditions, land cover usage, and orography. To model the complex relationships between the predictor variables and wildfires, we use a hybrid statistical deep-learning framework that can disentangle the effects of vapour-pressure deficit (VPD), air temperature, and drought on wildfire activity. Our results highlight that whilst VPD, air temperature, and drought significantly affect wildfire occurrence, only VPD affects wildfire spread. To gain insights into the effect of climate trends on wildfires in the near future, we focus on August 2001 and perturb temperature according to its observed trends (median over Europe: +0.04K per year). We find that, on average over Europe, these trends lead to a relative increase of 17.1\% and 1.6\% in the expected frequency and severity, respectively, of wildfires in August 2001, with spatially non-uniform changes in both aspects.

Explore related subjects

stat.APstat.ML

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jordan Richards, Raphaël Huser, Emanuele Bevacqua, Jakob Zscheischler. 2023-06-05. Insights into the drivers and spatio-temporal trends of extreme Mediterranean wildfires with statistical deep-learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.01796

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Auditing Bayesian Graph Alignment: Diagnostic Comparisons and Reference Failure

Bayesian graph alignment estimates correspondence probabilities, but convergence of an alignment-score trace need not imply accurate correspondence marginals. We audit this gap on 240 new exact graph pairs from four source families, 240 larger pairs with 20-100 vertices, and a separate 60-case exact implementation check. Under an explicit edge-flip likelihood, we compare three samplers and score, marginal, indicator, categorical, and classifier-based diagnostics. Marginal disagreement improves error discrimination over score R-hat for the exact informed sampler, but its improvement for vanilla local sampling is uncertain. Assignment-based R* and short indicator panels are competitive; no diagnostic dominates across samplers and endpoints. At larger sizes, diagnostics predict subsequent marginal changes, not posterior error, and classification performance depends on the drift threshold. Disjoint-window and held-out-chain checks attenuate but preserve positive associations. Only 22 of 240 original reference sets pass an agreement screen. On forty failure-selected cases, eightfold SMC particle escalation does not resolve disagreement, whereas additional rejuvenation helps. Longer informed runs remain unstable. An elementary feasible-alignment bound demonstrates severely unrepresentative SMC and informed-chain scores in concentrated 100-vertex cases, independently of approximate reference consensus. We also exhibit common-start chains with near-zero disagreement despite exact marginal error near .967. These results support assignment-sensitive auditing while identifying limits of finite budgets, diagnostic rankings, and reference agreement as evidence of accuracy.

stat.AP↗
arXiv2026

GeoDose-CP: Graph-Local Conformal Inference for Continuous-Treatment Earth Observation

Reliable intervention-oriented uncertainty quantification from Earth observation (EO) remains challenging when continuous treatment shifts, spatial dependence, limited support, and satellite-outcome uncertainty must be addressed simultaneously. Existing causal, conformal, and spatial approaches address parts of this problem, but their direct combination does not generally recover the appropriate interventional reference law because candidate reassignment jointly alters treatment likelihood, standardized residuals, and graph-dependent residual likelihood. This study presents GeoDose-CP, a support-aware conformal framework for localized stochastic potential outcomes under continuous or mixed continuous-atomic treatment. Its central methodological contribution is a graph-local target-orbit law that jointly represents intervention-induced treatment shift, the inverse outcome-scale Jacobian, and spatial residual dependence. The framework further provides exact weighted candidate inversion, a scalable sparse approximation with explicit discrepancy accounting, and refusal under inadequate support. Evaluation used controlled known-truth experiments, MineDoseBench, treatment-density sensitivity analysis, external conformal comparators, and a multi-mine New South Wales (NSW) study. In MineDoseBench, GeoDose-CP achieved mean selective coverage of 0.9692 across 27 configurations and a minimum local q0.05 of 0.8951; exact-sparse auditing produced nine inclusion disagreements over 2,700 targets. In the NSW study, the absence of an auditable longitudinal rehabilitation treatment rendered treatment-dependent inference nonoperational rather than forcing inference through a proxy exposure.

stat.AP↗
arXiv2026

Interpreting relative utility for probabilistic predictions

At a fixed threshold, relative utility (RU) measures the net-benefit gain of a prediction model over the better of treat-all and treat-none relative to the corresponding gain under perfect outcome classification. We illustrate that RU equal to 1 therefore represents perfect outcome classification at that fixed threshold, not perfect probabilistic prediction. However, even when every predicted probability equals the true probability, observed RU can equal 0. In a simple constant-risk setting, this occurs with probability approaching 1 as the sample size increases. Consequently, the distance from observed RU to 1 should not in general be interpreted as improvement achievable by a better prediction for binary probabilities.

stat.AP↗