PARAMETERIZATION AND VERIFICATION OF A FOREST FIRE AGENT-BASED MODEL AS A TOOL FOR ECOLOGICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/biosystems2026.01.040Keywords:
agent-based modeling, NetLogo, forest fire spread, cellular automaton, spatiotemporal dynamics, ecological hazardAbstract
This paper presents the results of parameterization and sensitivity-based verification of an extended agent-based forest fire spread model built on the NetLogo Fire platform. The model incorporates five controllable parameters – environmental moisture, wind speed, wind direction, slope gradient, and fuel type – through a multiplicative ignition probability formula. Verification was conducted using a BehaviorSpace sensitivity analysis across three experimental series, totaling 1,380 simulation runs. A critical percolation threshold was identified at forest density of approximately 55%, consistent with theoretical predictions for two-dimensional lattices with Moore neighborhood connectivity. Forest density was found to be the sole statistically significant predictor of fire extent (ρ = 0.984, p < 0.001). The two fuel types exhibited qualitatively distinct responses to moisture: deciduous forest showed a sharp phase transition in the 40–60% moisture range, while conifer forest showed a monotonic decline without a distinct threshold, maintaining active fire spread even at maximum moisture levels. The effects of wind speed and slope on fire extent were not statistically confirmed under supercritical conditions, identifying a direction for further model refinement. The verified model is suitable for preliminary ecological hazard screening and comparative scenario analysis of wildfire risk.
References
1. Chernogor, L. F., Nekos, A. N., Titenko, G. V., & Chornohor, L. L. (2024). Parameters and environmental consequences of catastrophic fires in Ukraine: modeling, quantitative estimates. Man and Environment. Issues of Neoecology, (42), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.26565/1992-4224-2024-42-06 [In Ukrainian].
2. Christensen, K., & Moloney, N. R. (2005). Complexity and criticality. Imperial College Press. https://doi.org/10.1142/p365
3. Driscoll, D. A., Armenteras, D., Bennett, A. F., Brotons, L., Clarke, M. F., Doherty, T. S., Haslem, A., Kelly, L. T., Sato, C. F., Sitters, H., Aquilué, N., Bell, K., Chadid, M., Duane, A., Meza-Elizalde, M. C., Giljohann, K. M., González, T. M., Jambhekar, R., Lazzari, J., Morán-Ordóñez, A., & Wevill, T. (2021).
How fire interacts with habitat loss and fragmentation. Biological Reviews, 96(3), 976–998. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12687
4. Dutta, S., Sen, S., Khatun, T., Dutta, T., & Tarafdar, S. (2019). Euler number and percolation threshold on a square lattice with diagonal connection probability and revisiting the island–mainland transition. Frontiers in Physics, 7, 61. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2019.00061
5. Guisoni, N., Loscar, E. S., & Albano, E. V. (2011). Phase diagram and critical behavior of a forest-fire model in a gradient of immunity. Physical Review E, 83(1), 011125. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.83.011125
6. Herasymchuk, D. O., Herasymchuk, L. O., Valerko, R. A., Patsev, I. S., & Kyrylenko, N. P. (2025). Environmental risks of forest fires in Ukraine considering climatic, anthropogenic, and warfare-related determinants. Ecological Sciences, 6(63), 216–220. https://doi.org/10.32846/2306-9716/2025.eco.6-63.34 [In Ukrainian].
7. Kelley, D. I., Burton, C., Di Giuseppe, F., Jones, M. W., Barbosa, M. L. F., Brambleby, E., McNorton, J. R., Liu, Z., Bradley, A. S. I., Blackford, K., Burke, E., Ciavarella, A., Di Tomaso, E., Eden, J., Ferreira, I. J. M., Fiedler, L., Hartley, A. J., Keeping, T. R., Lampe, S., … Kolden, C. A. (2025). State of wildfires 2024–2025. Earth System Science Data, 17, 5377–5488. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-5377-2025
8. Niazi, M. A., Siddique, Q., Hussain, A., & Kolberg, M. (2010).
Verification & validation of an agent-based forest fire simulation model. In Proceedings of the 2010 Spring Simulation Multiconference (Article 1, pp. 1–8). Society for Computer Simulation International. https://doi.org/10.1145/1878537.1878539
9. Or, D., Furtak-Cole, E., Berli, M., Shillito, R., Ebrahimian, H., Vahdat-Aboueshagh, H., & McKenna, S. A. (2023). Review of wildfire modeling considering effects on land surfaces. Earth-Science Reviews, 245, 104569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2023.104569
10. Pallozzi, E., Lusini, I., Cherubini, L., Hajiaghayeva, R. A., Ciccioli, P., & Calfapietra, C. (2018). Differences between a deciduous and a conifer tree species in gaseous and particulate emissions from biomass burning. Environmental Pollution, 234, 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.080
11. Pires, R., Torres, P., Valente, N. A., Solteiro Pires, E. J., Reis, A., Oliveira, P. D. M., & Barroso, J. (2025). Agent-based simulation of forest fire spread with NetLogo. In M. Antona & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), HCI International 2025 – Late Breaking Papers (pp. 212–224). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-12781-5_14
12. R Core Team (2025). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
13. Rao, J. N., & Parsai, T. (2026). A review on wildfire-induced changes in soil and surface water chemistry. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 207, 108343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2025.10834
14. Rothermel, R. C. (1972). A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels (Research Paper INT-115). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/32533
15. Rossa, C. G. (2017). The effect of fuel moisture content on the spread rate of forest fires in the absence of wind or slope. International journal of wildland fire, 26(1), 24-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/WF16049
16. Rossa, C. G., & Fernandes, P. M. (2017). On the effect of live fuel moisture content on fire-spread rate. Forest systems, 26(3), 12. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2017263-12019
17. Shelyuk, Y. S., Astakhova, L. E., & Osetska, L. S. (2024). Resin-bearing plants of various types of plant communities of the Central Polissia. Ukrainian Journal of Natural Sciences, (7), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.32782/naturaljournal.7.2024.6 [In Ukrainian].
18. Silva, J., Marques, J., Gonçalves, I., Brito, R., Teixeira, S., Teixeira, J., & Alvelos, F. (2022).
A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of wildland fire behavior modeling. Fluids, 7, 374. https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids7120374
19. Terrei, L., Flity, H., Ikhou, O., Trohel, G., Torero, J. L., Acem, Z., & Parent, G. (2024). Effect of the wood species on the fire behavior in vertical orientation. Fire Safety Journal, 148, 104234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2024.104234
20. Vorobiev, A. (2025). Analysis of Forest Fire Statistics and Their Impact on Ukraine’s Climate Based on Satellite Imagery Data Processing in the Global Information System GWIS. Ukrainian Journal of Remote Sensing, 12(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.36023/ujrs.2025.12.1.279 [In Ukrainian].
21. Voron, V. P., Kuzyk, A. D., Ivashyniuta, S. V., & Tsipan, Y. R. (2024). Forest fire hazard assessment based on forest typology. Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, (27), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.15421/412415 [In Ukrainian].
22. Wilensky, U. (1997). NetLogo Fire model. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/Fire. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
23. Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo [Computer software]. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. https://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/.
24. Young, B. A., Thompson, M. P., Moran, C. J., & Seielstad, C. A. (2025). Modeling neighborhoods as fuel for wildfire: A review. Fire Technology, 61, 5049–5071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-025-01773-3
