MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609495146 · doi:10.1063/1.4986496

How close are time series to power tail Lévy diffusions?

2017· article· en· W2609495146 on OpenAlexafffund
Jan Gairing, Michael A. Högele, Tania Kosenkova, Adam H. Monahan

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersFacultad de Ciencias, Universidad de los AndesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsCentral limit theoremSeries (stratigraphy)Power lawMathematicsStatistical physicsLimit (mathematics)JumpCoupling (piping)Convergence (economics)Applied mathematicsLawMathematical analysisPhysicsStatisticsGeologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a new and easily implementable method to quantify the so-called coupling distance between the law of a time series and the law of a differential equation driven by Markovian additive jump noise with heavy-tailed jumps, such as α-stable Lévy flights. Coupling distances measure the proximity of the empirical law of the tails of the jump increments and a given power law distribution. In particular, they yield an upper bound for the distance of the respective laws on path space. We prove rates of convergence comparable to the rates of the central limit theorem which are confirmed by numerical simulations. Our method applied to a paleoclimate time series of glacial climate variability confirms its heavy tail behavior. In addition, this approach gives evidence for heavy tails in datasets of precipitable water vapor of the Western Tropical Pacific.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207