The trade-off
Higher recall can mean more false positives and more review work. We accept that trade-off to reduce missed smoke detections; false alarms still have an operational cost.
The wildfire management platform I lead at 1.5°C, with our engineering, ML, and environmental science team — from risk analysis and smoke detection to response and impact assessment.
Raw footage from the camera network. The system patrols preset views, flags a smoke candidate, and zooms in for another check. Detections that cross the confidence threshold go to our 24/7 team for review.
Missing real smoke can delay the response to a wildfire. In this application, that false negative carries a greater cost than a false positive. We prioritize recall in the smoke detection model: finding more of the real smoke occurrences.
Higher recall can mean more false positives and more review work. We accept that trade-off to reduce missed smoke detections; false alarms still have an operational cost.
A model detection is a candidate for validation. The camera checks and human review described above are part of the path to a confirmed alert. Model precision and the quality of alerts reaching the customer must be evaluated separately.
The camera network and computer vision models flag signs of smoke for validation and early response.
Weather, fuel, and terrain layered together to flag where a fire is likely to start or spread next.
Supporting the coordination of a field response once a detection is confirmed.
Measuring what changed afterward — area burned, land recovered — the case for doing this at all.
A team of 8 — engineering, geospatial, and data science — running on Agile and OKRs. I've owned the architecture end to end as co-founder and CTO since 2020.
If you lead an early-stage climate or govtech team and want a technical second opinion, or you're building something in wildfire or geospatial monitoring, write to me.