Exploring and Visualizing Research Progress and Emerging Trends of Event Prediction: A Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last decade, event prediction has drawn attention from both academic and industry communities, resulting in a substantial volume of scientific papers published in a wide range of journals by scholars from different countries and disciplines. However, thus far, a comprehensive and systematic survey of recent literature has been lacking to quantitatively capture the research progress as well as emerging trends in the event prediction field. Aiming at addressing this gap, we employed CiteSpace software to analyze and visualize data retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database, including authors, documents, research institutions, and keywords, based on which the author co-citation network, document co-citation network, collaborative institution network, and keyword co-occurrence network were constructed. Through analyzing the aforementioned networks, we identified areas of active research, influential literature, collaborations at the national level, interdisciplinary patterns, and emerging trends by identifying the central nodes and the nodes with strong citation bursts. It reveals that sensor data has been widely used for predicting weather events and meteorological events (e.g., monitoring sea surface temperature and weather sensor data for predicting El Nino). The real-time and multivariable monitoring features of sensor data enable it to be a reliable source for predicting multiple types of events. Our work offers not only a comprehensive survey of the existing studies but also insights into the development trends within the event prediction field. These findings will assist researchers in conducting further research in this area and draw a large readership among academia and industrial communities who are engaged in event prediction research.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.044 | 0.054 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".