Paper detail

Predictability of threshold exceedances in dynamical systems

In a low-order model of the general circulation of the atmosphere we examine the predictability of threshold exceedance events of certain observables. The likelihood of such binary events -- the cornerstone also for the categoric (as opposed to probabilistic) prediction of threshold exceedences -- is established from long time series of one or more observables of the same system. The prediction skill is measured by a summary index of the ROC curve that relates the hit- and false alarm rates. Our results for the examined systems suggest that exceedances of higher thresholds are more predictable; or in other words: rare large magnitude, i.e., extreme, events are more predictable than frequent typical events. We find this to hold provided that the bin size for binning time series data is optimized, but not necessarily otherwise. This can be viewed as a confirmation of a counterintuitive (and seemingly contrafactual) statement that was previously formulated for more simple autoregressive stochastic processes. However, we argue that for dynamical systems in general it may be typical only, but not universally true. We argue that when there is a sufficient amount of data depending on the precision of observation, the skill of a class of data-driven categoric predictions of threshold exceedences approximates the skill of the analogous model-driven prediction, assuming strictly no model errors. Furthermore, we show that a quantity commonly regarded as a measure of predictability, the finite-time maximal Lyapunov exponent, does not correspond directly to the ROC-based measure of prediction skill when they are viewed as functions of the prediction lead time and the threshold level. This points to the fact that even if the Lyapunov exponent as an intrinsic property of the system, measuring the instability of trajectories, determines predictability, it does that in a nontrivial manner.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.