Low-dimensional paradigms for high-dimensional hetero-chaos

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The dynamics on a chaotic attractor can be quite heterogeneous, being much more unstable in some regions than others. Some regions of a chaotic attractor can be expanding in more dimensions than other regions. Imagine a situation where two such regions and each contains trajectories that stay in the region for all time while typical trajectories wander throughout the attractor. Such an attractor is "hetero-chaotic" (i.e. it has heterogeneous chaos) if furthermore arbitrarily close to each point of the attractor there are points on periodic orbits that have different unstable dimensions. This is hard to picture but we believe that most physical systems possessing a high-dimensional attractor are of this type. We have created simplified models with that behavior to give insight to real high-dimensional phenomena.

Related collections

Most cited references 2

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Forecasting natural hazards, performance of scientists, ethics, and the need for transparency

Fausto Guzzetti (2015)

Landslides are one of several natural hazards. As other natural hazards, landslides are difficult to predict, and their forecasts are uncertain. The uncertainty depends on the poor understanding of the phenomena that control the slope failures, and on the inherent complexity and chaotic nature of the landslides. This is similar to other natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts. Due to the severe impact of landslides on the population, the environment, and the economy, forecasting landslides is of scientific interest and of societal relevance, and scientists attempting to forecast landslides face known and new problems intrinsic to the multifaceted interactions between science, decision-making, and the society. The problems include deciding on the authority and reliability of individual scientists and groups of scientists, and evaluating the performances of individual scientists, research teams, and their institutions. Related problems lay in the increasing subordination of research scientists to politics and decision-makers, and in the conceptual and operational models currently used to organize and pay for research, based on apparently objective criteria and metrics, considering science as any other human endeavor, and favoring science that produces results of direct and immediate application. The paper argues that the consequences of these problems have not been considered fully.