↓ Skip to main content

Cross-scale interactions, nonlinearities, and forecasting catastrophic events

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, October 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
20 X users
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
380 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
412 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cross-scale interactions, nonlinearities, and forecasting catastrophic events
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, October 2004
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0403822101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debra P. C. Peters, Roger A. Pielke, Brandon T. Bestelmeyer, Craig D. Allen, Stuart Munson-McGee, Kris M. Havstad

Abstract

Catastrophic events share characteristic nonlinear behaviors that are often generated by cross-scale interactions and feedbacks among system elements. These events result in surprises that cannot easily be predicted based on information obtained at a single scale. Progress on catastrophic events has focused on one of the following two areas: nonlinear dynamics through time without an explicit consideration of spatial connectivity [Holling, C. S. (1992) Ecol. Monogr. 62, 447-502] or spatial connectivity and the spread of contagious processes without a consideration of cross-scale interactions and feedbacks [Zeng, N., Neeling, J. D., Lau, L. M. & Tucker, C. J. (1999) Science 286, 1537-1540]. These approaches rarely have ventured beyond traditional disciplinary boundaries. We provide an interdisciplinary, conceptual, and general mathematical framework for understanding and forecasting nonlinear dynamics through time and across space. We illustrate the generality and usefulness of our approach by using new data and recasting published data from ecology (wildfires and desertification), epidemiology (infectious diseases), and engineering (structural failures). We show that decisions that minimize the likelihood of catastrophic events must be based on cross-scale interactions, and such decisions will often be counterintuitive. Given the continuing challenges associated with global change, approaches that cross disciplinary boundaries to include interactions and feedbacks at multiple scales are needed to increase our ability to predict catastrophic events and develop strategies for minimizing their occurrence and impacts. Our framework is an important step in developing predictive tools and designing experiments to examine cross-scale interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 412 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 24 6%
Sweden 7 2%
Germany 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Argentina 3 <1%
Australia 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Ecuador 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 358 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 100 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 93 23%
Student > Master 43 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 24 6%
Professor 21 5%
Other 60 15%
Unknown 71 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 131 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 101 25%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 29 7%
Engineering 14 3%
Social Sciences 13 3%
Other 37 9%
Unknown 87 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,128,598
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#16,765
of 102,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,245
of 75,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#28
of 478 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 102,700 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 75,410 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 478 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.