Areawise significance tests for windowed recurrence network analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many time-series analysis techniques use sliding window approaches or are repeatedly applied over a continuous range of parameters. When combined with a significance test, intrinsic correlations among the pointwise analysis results can make falsely positive significant points appear as continuous patches rather than as isolated points. To account for this effect, we present an areawise significance test that identifies such false-positive patches. For this purpose, we numerically estimate the decorrelation length of the statistic of interest by calculating correlation functions between the analysis results and require an areawise significant point to belong to a patch of pointwise significant points that is larger than this decorrelation length. We apply our areawise test to results from windowed traditional and scale-specific recurrence network analysis in order to identify dynamical anomalies in time series of a non-stationary Rössler system and tree ring width index values from Eastern Canada. Especially, in the palaeoclimate context, the areawise testing approach markedly reduces the number of points that are identified as significant and therefore highlights only the most relevant features in the data. This provides a crucial step towards further establishing recurrence networks as a tool for palaeoclimate data analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".