Back to search
2410.16277

The role of edge states for early-warning of tipping points

Johannes Lohmann, Alfred B. Hansen, Alessandro Lovo, Ruth Chapman, Freddy Bouchet, Valerio Lucarini

incompletemedium confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Strong Field
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper proposes, with simulations and heuristic arguments, that observables aligned with the edge state/instanton direction exhibit the strongest early-warning signals, and documents alignment of precritical fluctuations with that direction in multiple models, including a realistic ocean model. However, the paper explicitly states that a general theoretical underpinning and a definitive criterion are lacking. By contrast, the model’s solution provides a standard OU/linear-response derivation that variance diverges like 1/(-Re α1) and lag-Δ autocorrelation tends to e^{α1Δ} along the leading eigenvector, plus a center-manifold/instanton alignment argument in the gradient case—precisely the missing theoretical backbone. The paper’s key claims (edge/instanton alignment and directional EWS) are supported empirically but not proved, and the authors themselves call for theory. Hence: paper incomplete, model correct. See the paper’s abstract and discussion of instanton-directed fluctuations and edge-state-guided observables, as well as the explicit note that more theory is needed for a general criterion .

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} major revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field

\textbf{Justification:}

Compelling numerical evidence and a clear methodological proposal: select EWS observables using the edge/instanton direction. The study spans conceptual to high-dimensional models and documents strong alignment of fluctuations with the edge direction and muted CSD for canonical but misaligned variables. However, the manuscript lacks a concise theoretical framework establishing optimality and scaling of the proposed observables; the authors themselves note that a general theoretical underpinning is missing. Adding an analytical backbone (even at the level of a short appendix with assumptions) and clarifying limitations would substantially strengthen the paper’s correctness and generality.