Risk Is Not the Target: A Monotonic Framework for Evaluating Wildfire Operational Risk Signals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.21597v1
• Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:28:57 GMT
• Title: Risk Is Not the Target: A Monotonic Framework for Evaluating Wildfire Operational Risk Signals
• Abstract summary: evaluating wildfire risk systems using standard machine-learning metrics such as F1-score or IoU is fundamentally flawed.<n>This work proposes a novel monotonic evaluation framework that measures whether increases in a predicted risk score consistently correspond to increases in observed operational load.
• Score: 0.9099663022952497
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Evaluating wildfire risk systems using standard machine-learning metrics such as F1-score or IoU is fundamentally flawed: these metrics assess event prediction accuracy, not the operational coherence of a continuous risk signal. This work proposes a novel monotonic evaluation framework that measures whether increases in a predicted risk score consistently correspond to increases in observed operational load, such as number of fires, intervention time, and deployed resources. Moreover, we compare three structurally different approaches on the French Alpes-Maritimes department: the expert-based DFE index, GRU- based predictive models, and FARS, a hybrid multi-agent system combining predictive AI with LLM-based reasoning. Experimental results reveal that the DFE, despite poor classification metrics, exhibits the most balanced monotonic behavior across the full risk scale. GRU models achieve strong local monotonicity but fail to produce well-distributed risk levels. FARS inherits and reveals the structural limitations of upstream signals rather than correcting them. The central finding is a paradigm shift: a good risk model does not predict fires accurately, but one whose ordinal scale meaningfully explains operational dynamics, as proved in this paper. Code of the monotonic framework is available on github.

Related papers

• Modeling Local Exploit Hazard - A Bayesian Framework for Quantifying Exploit Risk and Operational Efficiency [0.0]
  Local exploit hazard model converts global probabilities produced by an exploit likelihood model into a daily exploit hazard rate for an organization's own assets.<n>Model measures the exploit-prevention effectiveness of deployed controls as a probability distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T16:15:00Z)
• GroundControl: Anticipating Navigation Failures in Vision-Language Agents via Trajectory-Consistent Uncertainty Estimates [3.7267095596919053]
  Vision-language navigation agents achieve competitive average success on benchmark tasks, yet failures often arise through predictable trajectory-level breakdowns.<n>Reliable deployment requires uncertainty signals that anticipate emerging failure dynamics during execution rather than reflect only instantaneous action entropy.<n>We introduce emphGroundControl, a trajectory-consistent uncertainty estimator defined as statistical deviation from nominal goal-directed distance-to-goal dynamics aggregated over an episode.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-18T16:56:20Z)
• Action-Conditioned Risk Gating for Safety-Critical Control under Partial Observability [79.08785366532287]
  We propose a lightweight risk-gated reinforcement learning approximation for risk-sensitive control under partial observability.<n>We evaluate the approach in two safety-critical partially observable domains: automated glucose regulation and safety-constrained navigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T01:23:09Z)
• Safety-Oriented Evaluation of Language Understanding Systems for Air Traffic Control [7.102251210849638]
  We propose a safety-oriented, consequence-aware evaluation framework tailored to Air Traffic Control (ATC) operations.<n>Our results reveal that while current LLMs achieve reasonable aggregate accuracy, their operational reliability is severely limited.<n>These findings highlight the necessity of consequence-aware evaluation protocols for the responsible deployment of AI-assisted ATC systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T08:39:54Z)
• Emergent Strategic Reasoning Risks in AI: A Taxonomy-Driven Evaluation Framework [63.74295981594549]
  Large language models (LLMs) engage in behaviors that serve their own objectives.<n>These include, but are not limited to, deception (intentionally misleading users or evaluators), evaluation gaming (strategically manipulating performance during safety testing), and reward hacking.<n>We introduce ESRRSim, a taxonomy-driven agentic framework for automated behavioral risk evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T23:44:01Z)
• Building a Foundational Guardrail for General Agentic Systems via Synthetic Data [76.18834864749606]
  LLM agents can plan multi-step tasks, intervening at the planning stage-before any action is executed-is often the safest way to prevent harm.<n>Existing guardrails mostly operate post-execution, which is difficult to scale and leaves little room for controllable supervision at the plan level.<n>We introduce AuraGen, a controllable engine that synthesizes benign trajectories, injects category-labeled risks with difficulty, and filters outputs via an automated reward model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-10T18:42:32Z)
• MARBLE: A Multi-Agent Rule-Based LLM Reasoning Engine for Accident Severity Prediction [1.3102025155414727]
  Accident severity prediction plays a critical role in transportation safety systems.<n>Existing methods often rely on monolithic models or black box prompting.<n>We propose a multiagent rule based LLM engine that decomposes the severity prediction task across a team of specialized reasoning agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T11:27:49Z)
• Cannot See the Forest for the Trees: Invoking Heuristics and Biases to Elicit Irrational Choices of LLMs [83.11815479874447]
  We propose a novel jailbreak attack framework, inspired by cognitive decomposition and biases in human cognition.<n>We employ cognitive decomposition to reduce the complexity of malicious prompts and relevance bias to reorganize prompts.<n>We also introduce a ranking-based harmfulness evaluation metric that surpasses the traditional binary success-or-failure paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T05:28:11Z)
• Controlling Risk of Retrieval-augmented Generation: A Counterfactual Prompting Framework [77.45983464131977]
  We focus on how likely it is that a RAG model's prediction is incorrect, resulting in uncontrollable risks in real-world applications.<n>Our research identifies two critical latent factors affecting RAG's confidence in its predictions.<n>We develop a counterfactual prompting framework that induces the models to alter these factors and analyzes the effect on their answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T14:52:14Z)
• Safe Deployment for Counterfactual Learning to Rank with Exposure-Based Risk Minimization [63.93275508300137]
  We introduce a novel risk-aware Counterfactual Learning To Rank method with theoretical guarantees for safe deployment. Our experimental results demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed method, which is effective at avoiding initial periods of bad performance when little data is available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-26T15:54:23Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.