MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001712064 · doi:10.1103/physreve.78.051113

Return interval distribution of extreme events and long-term memory

2008· article· en· W2001712064 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. S. Santhanam, Hölger Kantz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)Interval (graph theory)Exponential distributionExponential functionSeries (stratigraphy)Term (time)MathematicsDistribution (mathematics)Return periodExtreme value theoryStatistical physicsStatisticsEconometricsMathematical analysisPhysicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution of recurrence times or return intervals between extreme events is important to characterize and understand the behavior of physical systems and phenomena in many disciplines. It is well known that many physical processes in nature and society display long-range correlations. Hence, in the last few years, considerable research effort has been directed towards studying the distribution of return intervals for long-range correlated time series. Based on numerical simulations, it was shown that the return interval distributions are of stretched exponential type. In this paper, we obtain an analytical expression for the distribution of return intervals in long-range correlated time series which holds good when the average return intervals are large. We show that the distribution is actually a product of power law and a stretched exponential form. We also discuss the regimes of validity and perform detailed studies on how the return interval distribution depends on the threshold used to define extreme events.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations114
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207