Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2607.07286

From Statistical to Structural Synergy: A Predictability Framework to Quantify the Effects due to High-Order Mechanisms

Yuri Antonacci·Chiara Barà·Laura Sparacino·Daniele Marinazzo·Luca Faes·Sebastiano Stramaglia
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

High-order interactions are increasingly recognized as a hallmark of collective dynamics in complex systems. The relationship between high-order behaviours (HOBs), observed as synergistic or redundant statistical dependencies, and high-order mechanisms (HOMs), related to the structural or dynamical rules of the data-generating process, remains difficult to establish from data. We introduce a predictability-based framework to disentangle these two levels of description in complex network systems. Structural synergy is defined as the excess predictive power gained when two sources are considered jointly beyond the best additive description and is estimated through polynomial regression by comparing a model with interaction terms against an additive model. Simulations show that dependencies among sources reflecting HOBs can arise even in the absence of HOMs, while synergy due to a non-additive mechanism may remain hidden when the observed synergy-redundancy balance is dominated by redundancy and become detectable only through structural synergy. Applications to climate and source-reconstructed cortical EEG dynamics reveal significant non-additive predictive components despite predominantly redundancy-dominated HOBs. These findings emphasize that HOBs and HOMs can dissociate: a system may display redundancy-dominated HOBs while still containing a significant synergistic mechanism. The proposed framework supports a mechanistically informed interpretation of complex-system dynamics and may help to identify when mechanism-based models are needed to predict the response of a system to perturbations or interventions, while also recognizing that structural synergy should be interpreted as evidence of non-additive predictive structure rather than as a direct identification of the underlying generative mechanism.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yuri Antonacci, Chiara Barà, Laura Sparacino, Daniele Marinazzo, Luca Faes, Sebastiano Stramaglia. 2026-07-08. From Statistical to Structural Synergy: A Predictability Framework to Quantify the Effects due to High-Order Mechanisms. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07286

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗