Predicting critical transitions with machine learning trained on surrogates of historical data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical transitions can occur in many natural and man-made systems. Generic early warning signals motivated by dynamical systems theory have had mixed success on real noisy data. More recent studies found that deep learning classifiers trained on synthetic data could improve performance. However, to the best of our knowledge, neither of these methods take advantage of historical, system-specific data. Here, we introduce an approach that trains machine learning classifiers on surrogate data of past transitions. The approach provides early warning signals in empirical and experimental data with higher sensitivity and specificity than two widely used generic early warning signals—variance and lag-1 autocorrelation. Since the approach is trained on surrogates of historical data, it is not bound by the restricting assumption of a local bifurcation like previous methods. This system-specific approach can contribute to improved early warning signals to help humans better prepare for or avoid undesirable critical transitions. Critical transitions often lead to catastrophic regime shifts, so reliable early warning signals are crucial to prevent irreversible damage. Here, the authors present a system-specific framework for early warning of tipping points in complex systems via training machine learning models on surrogate data extracted from limited availability historical records.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".