A statistical physics and dynamical systems perspective on geophysical extreme events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistical physics and dynamical systems theory are key tools to study high-impact geophysical events such as temperature extremes, cyclones, thunderstorms, geomagnetic storms and many more. Despite the intrinsic differences between these events, they all originate as temporary deviations from the typical trajectories of a geophysical system, resulting in well-organised, coherent structures at characteristic spatial and temporal scales. While statistical extreme value analysis techniques are capable to provide return times and probabilities of occurrence of certain geophysical events, they are not apt to account for their underlying physics. Their focus is to compute the probability of occurrence of events that are large or small with respect to some specific observable (e.g. temperature, precipitation, solar wind), rather than to relate rare or extreme phenomena to the underlying anomalous geophysical regimes. This paper outlines this knowledge gap, presenting some related challenges, new formalisms and briefly commenting on how stochastic approaches tailored to the study of extreme geophysical events can help to advance their understanding.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".