Tipping points in coupled human–environment system models: a review
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
Abstract. Mathematical models that couple human behavior to environmental processes can offer valuable insights into how human behavior affects various types of ecological, climate, and epidemiological systems. This review focuses on human drivers of tipping events in coupled human–environment systems where changes to the human system can abruptly lead to desirable or undesirable new human–environment states. We use snowball sampling from relevant search terms to review the modeling of social processes – such as social norms and rates of social change – that are shown to drive tipping events, finding that many affect the coupled system depending on the system type and initial conditions. For example, tipping points can manifest very differently in human extraction versus human emission systems. Some potential interventions, such as reducing costs associated with sustainable behavior, have intuitive results. However, their beneficial outcomes via less obvious tipping events are highlighted. Of the models reviewed, we found that greater structural complexity can be associated with increased potential for tipping events. We review generic and state-of-the-art techniques in early warning signals of tipping events and identify significant opportunities to utilize digital social data to look for such signals. We conclude with an outline of challenges and promising future directions specific to furthering our understanding and informing policy that promotes sustainability within coupled human–environment systems. Non-technical summary. Mathematical models that include interactions between humans and the environment can provide valuable information to further our understanding of tipping points. Many social processes such as social norms and rates of social change can affect these tipping points in ways that are often specific to the system being modeled. Higher complexity of social structure can increase the likelihood of these transitions. We discuss how data are used to predict tipping events across many coupled systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.006 |
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