MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191247104 · doi:10.3390/e23081025

Evaluating Temporal Correlations in Time Series Using Permutation Entropy, Ordinal Probabilities and Machine Learning

2021· article· en· W3191247104 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundInstitució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis AvançatsConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)Time seriesAlgorithmEntropy (arrow of time)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsChaoticPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.207 · 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