Multifractality Versus (Mono-) Fractality as Evidence of Nonlinear Interactions Across Timescales: Disentangling the Belief in Nonlinearity From the Diagnosis of Nonlinearity in Empirical Data
{"title":"Multifractality Versus (Mono-) Fractality as Evidence of Nonlinear Interactions Across Timescales: Disentangling the Belief in Nonlinearity From the Diagnosis of Nonlinearity in Empirical Data","authors":"Damian G. Kelty-Stephen, Sebastian Wallot","doi":"10.1080/10407413.2017.1368355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article addresses the still popular but incorrect idea that monofractal (sometimes called “fractal” for short) structure might be a definitive signature of nonlinearity and, as a corollary, that monofractal analyses are nonlinear analyses. That this point (i.e., “fractal = nonlinear”) is incorrect remains novel to many readers. We suspect that unfamiliarity with autocorrelation has helped eclipse the linearity of fractal structure from more popular appreciation. In this article, in order to explain the linear nature of monofractality and its difference from multifractality, we present an introduction to the autocorrelation function and review short-lag memory, nonstationary motions, and the intermediary set of fractionally integrated processes that conventional fractal analyses quantify. Understanding from our own experiences how surprising the linearity of fractals is to accept, we attempt to make our points clear with as much graphic depiction as math. We hope to share our own experiences in struggling with this potentially strange-sounding idea that, really, monofractals are linear while at the same time contrasting them to multifractals that can indicate nonlinearity.","PeriodicalId":47279,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Psychology","volume":"29 1","pages":"259 - 299"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10407413.2017.1368355","citationCount":"33","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2017.1368355","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article addresses the still popular but incorrect idea that monofractal (sometimes called “fractal” for short) structure might be a definitive signature of nonlinearity and, as a corollary, that monofractal analyses are nonlinear analyses. That this point (i.e., “fractal = nonlinear”) is incorrect remains novel to many readers. We suspect that unfamiliarity with autocorrelation has helped eclipse the linearity of fractal structure from more popular appreciation. In this article, in order to explain the linear nature of monofractality and its difference from multifractality, we present an introduction to the autocorrelation function and review short-lag memory, nonstationary motions, and the intermediary set of fractionally integrated processes that conventional fractal analyses quantify. Understanding from our own experiences how surprising the linearity of fractals is to accept, we attempt to make our points clear with as much graphic depiction as math. We hope to share our own experiences in struggling with this potentially strange-sounding idea that, really, monofractals are linear while at the same time contrasting them to multifractals that can indicate nonlinearity.
期刊介绍:
This unique journal publishes original articles that contribute to the understanding of psychological and behavioral processes as they occur within the ecological constraints of animal-environment systems. It focuses on problems of perception, action, cognition, communication, learning, development, and evolution in all species, to the extent that those problems derive from a consideration of whole animal-environment systems, rather than animals or their environments in isolation from each other. Significant contributions may come from such diverse fields as human experimental psychology, developmental/social psychology, animal behavior, human factors, fine arts, communication, computer science, philosophy, physical education and therapy, speech and hearing, and vision research.