Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 422

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surrogate data for hypothesis testing of physical systems

Open access
Lancaster, Gemma, Iatsenko, Dmytro, Pidde, Aleksandra, Ticcinelli, Valentina, Stefanovska, Aneta·2018·Physics Reports

Abstract

The availability of time series of the evolution of the properties of physical systems is increasing, stimulating the development of many novel methods for the extraction of information about their behaviour over time, including whether or not they arise from deterministic or stochastic dynamical systems. Surrogate data testing is an essential part of many of these methods, as it enables robust statistical evaluations to ensure that the results observed are not obtained by chance, but are a true characteristic of the underlying system. The surrogate data technique is based on the comparison of a particular property of the data (a discriminating statistic) with the distribution of the same property calculated in a set of constructed signals (surrogates) which match the original data set but do not possess the property that is being tested. Fourier transform based surrogates remain the most popular, yet many more options have since been developed to test increasingly varied null hypotheses while characterizing the dynamics of complex systems, including uncorrelated and correlated noise, coupling between systems, and synchronization. Here, we provide a detailed overview of a wide range of surrogate types, discuss their practical applications and demonstrate their use in both numerically simulated and real experimental systems. We also compare the performance of various surrogate types for the detection of nonlinearity, synchronization and coherence, coupling strength between systems, and the nature of coupling. A MatLab toolbox for many of the surrogate methods is provided.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.physrep.2018.06.001

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 422

Metadata

Authors
Lancaster, G., Iatsenko, D., Pidde, A., Ticcinelli, V., & Stefanovska, A.
Venue
Physics Reports
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
748
Pages
1-60
ISSN
0370-1573 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2808553959
Cited by
422
References
4
FWCI
20.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surrogate data for hypothesis testing of physical systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.physrep.2018.06.001
The paper
Lancaster, G., Iatsenko, D., Pidde, A., Ticcinelli, V., & Stefanovska, A. (2018). Surrogate data for hypothesis testing of physical systems. Physics Reports. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2018.06.001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.