SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2512.09835

Predicting the Containment Time of California Wildfires Using Machine Learning

Abstract

California's wildfire season keeps getting worse over the years, overwhelming the emergency response teams. These fires cause massive destruction to both property and human life. Because of these reasons, there's a growing need for accurate and practical predictions that can help assist with resources allocation for the Wildfire managers or the response teams. In this research, we built machine learning models to predict the number of days it will require to fully contain a wildfire in California. Here, we addressed an important gap in the current literature. Most prior research has concentrated on wildfire risk or how fires spread, and the few that examine the duration typically predict it in broader categories rather than a continuous measure. This research treats the wildfire duration prediction as a regression task, which allows for more detailed and precise forecasts rather than just the broader categorical predictions used in prior work. We built the models by combining three publicly available datasets from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP). This study compared the performance of baseline ensemble regressor, Random Forest and XGBoost, with a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network. The results show that the XGBoost model slightly outperforms the Random Forest model, likely due to its superior handling of static features in the dataset. The LSTM model, on the other hand, performed worse than the ensemble models because the dataset lacked temporal features. Overall, this study shows that, depending on the feature availability, Wildfire managers or Fire management authorities can select the most appropriate model to accurately predict wildfire containment duration and allocate resources effectively.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shashank Bhardwaj. 2025-12-10. Predicting the Containment Time of California Wildfires Using Machine Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.09835

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG