Skip to main content
Chad M. Hoffman, J. Ziegler, R. R. Linn, J. Canfield, W. Mell, Carolyn Hull Sieg, F. Pimont
Year Published:

Cataloging Information

Fire Behavior
Simulation Modeling

NRFSN number: 19838
Record updated:

We have read Cruz and Alexander’s comments regarding our manuscript titled ‘‘Evaluating Crown Fire Rate of Spread Predictions from Physics-Based Models’’ [1] and appreciate the opportunity to respond to their comments. In our original manuscript [1], we presented an evaluation of crown fire rate of spread predictions from two physics-based wildland fire behavior models: FIRETEC and the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Dynamics Simulator (WFDS). Our approach, as outlined in our original paper, relied upon using a previously published dataset of real-world crown fires, hereafter referred to as AC06 [2], and previously published fire rate of spread predictions. Following recommendations for model performance assessment proposed in Rykiel [3], we examined the proportion of simulated crown fire rates of spread that fell within a 95th percentile prediction interval we developed using the data in AC06. We also provided several discussion points about the challenges associated with evaluating physics-based model performance, potential sources of error/disagreement, and future research needs. Our manuscript built upon an existing body of work and offered insights based on one of many potential approaches that can be used to assess physics-based model performance. (more)


Hoffman, C. M.; Ziegler, J.; Linn, R. R.; Canfield, J.; Mell, W.; Sieg, C. H.; Pimont, F. 2019. Reply to Cruz and Alexander: Comments on “Evaluating Crown Fire Rate of Spread Predictions from Physics-Based Models.” Fire Technology. doi: 10.1007/s10694-019-00857-1.