Talk:Empirical dynamic modeling

Initial text
Dear Wikiverse,

Kindly consider this article for publication.

Regarding COI concern:

Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships.

While I have collaborated with the creators of EDM to ensure I use the techniques properly in data analysis, decision support, and education, I am not involved in any financial interests, or in the creation of these methods; nor is this article about myself, family, friends, clients, employers. I am a user, and, subject-matter expert. The latter a criteria for authorship of scientific and technical articles.

Regarding concern of notability:

Examination of the citations reveals that 15 of the works defining, and, describing uses and extensions of the techniques are published in the world's leading (Tier 1) scientific journals: Nature, Science, Proceedings of the National Acadamies of Science, and, Proceedings of the Royal Society. It is also notable that the methods have been applied, and continue to be applied, across scientific disciplines, as noted in the introduction.

Thank you again for your review! I hope we can bring these techniques into Wikipedia to further the use and development of nonlinear, state based techniques to all branches of scientific enquiry.

Sincerely, J Park (talk) 04:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Response to Charles Stewart : Independence and Notability Concerns
Kindly note my appreciation to Charles Stewart for reviewing the EDM draft.

Please note an earlier post discussed concerns of COI and notability. Additional evidence of notability can be offered:


 * 1) One of the original articles published in Nature has been cited in peer-reviewed scientific journal papers over two thousand times: Nonlinear forecasting as a way of distinguishing chaos from measurement error in time series
 * 2) An open source, publically available software package has been downloaded hundred of thousands of times: pyEDM
 * 3) The methods are used to forecast red tides: Chaos Theory May Help Predict Red Tides

Regarding evidence of independence:


 * 1) An article in the Proceedings of the National Acadamies of Science describing the methods Equation-free modeling unravels the behavior of complex ecological systems
 * 2) A prize winning scientific article by Chang et al Special Feature: Biwako Prize for Ecology Empirical dynamic modeling for beginners
 * 3) Examples of work by others leveraging the methods:
 * 4) Untangling Brain-Wide Dynamics in Consciousness by Cross-Embedding
 * 5) Non-parametric estimation of the structural stability of non-equilibrium community dynamics
 * 6) Sugihara causality analysis of scalp EEG for detection of early Alzheimer's disease
 * 7) Convergent cross sorting for estimating dynamic coupling
 * 8) Detecting alternative attractors in ecosystem dynamics
 * 9) Uncertainty quantification of the effects of biotic interactions on community dynamics from nonlinear time-series data
 * 10) Partial cross mapping eliminates indirect causal influences
 * 11) Causality Analysis: Identifying the Leading Element in a Coupled Dynamical System
 * 12) An empirical dynamic modeling framework for missing or irregular samples
 * 13) Trophic control changes with season and nutrient loading in lakes

I suggest it is natural that Sugihara is heavily cited in the article, albeit many times not as a first or second author, as his research lab has driven the development of the methods and their application. However in light of the evidence above, I propose sufficient independence and notability are demonstrated such that it is warranted to publish the EDM article as a stand alone topic linking to Robert May, George Sugihara.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this article.

Sincerely, J Park (talk) 08:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Review complete : Publish
Dear Colleagues,

Please note this page was originally "draftified" in January 2022. An editor review was provided on April 2. All editorial concerns have been addressed in revision, and, discused here. As there have been no more comments for a period of one month, I suggest this page be re-published.

Thank you for your review and guidance.

Sincerely, J Park (talk) 04:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)