Evaluating Temporal Correlations in Time Series Using Permutation Entropy, Ordinal Probabilities and Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time series analysis comprises a wide repertoire of methods for extracting information from data sets. Despite great advances in time series analysis, identifying and quantifying the strength of nonlinear temporal correlations remain a challenge. We have recently proposed a new method based on training a machine learning algorithm to predict the temporal correlation parameter, α, of flicker noise (FN) time series. The algorithm is trained using as input features the probabilities of ordinal patterns computed from FN time series, xαFN(t), generated with different values of α. Then, the ordinal probabilities computed from the time series of interest, x(t), are used as input features to the trained algorithm and that returns a value, αe, that contains meaningful information about the temporal correlations present in x(t). We have also shown that the difference, Ω, of the permutation entropy (PE) of the time series of interest, x(t), and the PE of a FN time series generated with α=αe, xαeFN(t), allows the identification of the underlying determinism in x(t). Here, we apply our methodology to different datasets and analyze how αe and Ω correlate with well-known quantifiers of chaos and complexity. We also discuss the limitations for identifying determinism in highly chaotic time series and in periodic time series contaminated by noise. The open source algorithm is available on Github.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".