Parallelizing Convergent Cross Mapping Using Apache Spark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying the causal relationships between subjects or variables remains an important problem across various scientific fields. This is particularly important but challenging in complex systems, such as those involving human behavior, sociotechnical contexts, and natural ecosystems. By exploiting state space reconstruction via lagged embedding of time series, convergent cross mapping (CCM) serves as an important method for addressing this problem. While powerful, CCM is computationally costly; moreover, CCM results are highly sensitive to several parameter values. While best practice entails exploring a range of parameter settings when assessing casual relationships, the resulting computational burden can raise barriers to practical use, especially for long time series exhibiting weak causal linkages. We demonstrate here several means of accelerating CCM by harnessing the distributed Apache Spark platform. We characterize and report on results of several experiments with parallelized solutions that demonstrate high scalability and a capacity for over an order of magnitude performance improvement for the baseline configuration. Such economies in computation time can speed learning and robust identification of causal drivers in complex systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".