arXiv Machine Learning

Towards Explainable Benchmarking for Data-driven Post-Wildfire Debris Flow Prediction

arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 7

Evaluating Machine Learning Models for Post-Wildfire Debris-Flow Prediction

arXiv:2608. 05265v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prediction of post-wildfire debris flows is critical for mitigating hazards to communities, infrastructure, and resources during intense rainfall in recently burned areas.

By Quinn Ledingham, Zhengsen Xu, Yimin Zhu, Zack Dewis, Mabel Heffring, Saeid Taleghanidoozdoozan, Motasem Alkayid, Megan Greenwood, Lincoln Linlin Xu
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 20

DELUGE: Towards Continental-Scale Daily Pluvial Flood Damage Prediction via Interpretable Conditioning on Foundation Model Embeddings

arXiv:2607. 16050v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pluvial (rainfall-driven) flooding accounts for 45% of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) claims in the United States and is harder to predict than its riverine and coastal counterparts, with existing approaches limited to coarse resolution, regional domains, or computationally intensive process-based models unsuitable for daily continental-scale use.

By Yuya Kawakami, Daniel Cayan, Dongyu Liu, Kwan-Liu Ma, Tom Corringham
arXiv AI
Sep 30

PyroStack: A Multi-Band Spatio-Temporal Sub-Daily Dataset for Wildfires in the United States

arXiv:2609.36315v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Wildfires are an increasing hazard to ecosystems, air quality, and human systems, creating a growing need for datasets that support systematic develo...

By Arya Kondur, Giosue Migliorini, Cameron Schmitt, Francesco Immorlano, Tairan Wang, Rebecca C. Scholten, Efi Foufoula-Georgiou, Gary Johnson, Chris Lautenberger, Valentin Waeselynck, J. Shane Romsos, Kasra Shamsaei, Alejandro Tejedor, Tianjia Liu, Yang Chen, Padhraic Smyth, James T. Randerson
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 17

Modular Deep Learning Mechanisms for Auditable Next-Day Wildfire Spread Prediction

The paper presents modular deep learning augmentations for next‑day wildfire spread prediction, including wind‑ and slope‑conditioned attention biases, physics‑feature retrieval‑augmented output correction, and fire‑conditioned dual‑stream gating. These modules are evaluated on five backbone models using the Next Day Wildfire Spread benchmark, with staged ablations, directional audits, retrieval perturbations, calibration measures, and computational comparisons. The best augmented SwinUNETR model achieves an F1 score of 0.4216 and an AUC‑PR of 0.3673, while a mixed ensemble reaches 0.4292 and 0.3790, demonstrating that predictive performance, operational trustworthiness, and computational practicality can be simultaneously improved.

By Miguel Esparza, Aydin Ayanzadeh Ahmad Mousavi, Ali Mostafavi
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 4

Uncovering Insights of Compound Flooding with Data-Driven AI

arXiv:2506. 04281v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Compound flooding, driven by nonlinear interactions between multiple hydrometeorological factors, poses a significant challenge to hazard prevention.

By Xu Zheng, Chaohao Lin, Sipeng Chen, Zhuomin Chen, Jimeng Shi, Jayantha Obeysekera, Jingchao Ni, Wei Cheng, Jason Liu, Dongsheng Luo
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 10

Spatiotemporal Seismic Hazard Assessment Using VQ-VAE and Seismic Statistical Features

arXiv:2606. 10069v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In this paper we build upon a previous study in which we demonstrated, using XGBoost and earthquake catalogue data from Japan and Chile, that a set of 60 seismic statistical features (SSFs) had much greater predictive value than a set of 428 generic time series features from the tsfresh package.

By Wei Quan, Denise Gorse
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 22

WildfireSpreadBench: The Metric Decides the Model in Wildfire Spread Prediction

WildfireSpreadBench evaluates machine‑learning models for predicting next‑day wildfire spread, comparing five discriminative and one generative architecture on the WildfireSpreadTS dataset. The study shows that model rankings differ markedly when using Average Precision versus threshold‑dependent metrics such as F1 and IoU, revealing three distinct prediction profiles—over‑predicting, balanced, and under‑predicting—that AP alone cannot distinguish. Expanding input channels modestly affected AP, underscoring that AP may favor models with predictions poorly suited for operational use.

By Arin Gopakumar, Marco Pannozzo