Supplementary material from "Multiscale entropy rate analysis of complex mobile agents"
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate prediction of the motion of objects is a central scientific goal. For deterministic or stochastic processes, models exist which characterize motion with a high degree of reliability. For complex systems, or those where objects have a degree of agency, characterizing motion is far more challenging. The information entropy rate of motion through a discrete space can place a limit on the predictability of even the most complex or history-dependent actor, but the variability in measured encountered locations is inexorably tied to the spatial and temporal resolutions of those measurements. This relation depends on the path of the actor in ways that can be used to derive a general law in closed form relating the mobility entropy rate to different spatial and temporal resolutions, and the path properties within each cell along the path. Correcting for spatial and temporal effects through regression yields the path properties and a measure of mobility entropy rate robust to changes in dimension, allowing comparison of mobility entropy rates between datasets. Employing this measure on empirical datasets yields novel findings, from the similarity of taxicabs to drifters, to the predictable motions of undergraduates, to the browsing habits of Canadian moose.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.408 | 0.001 |
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 it