Assesses entropy estimators' performance in quantifying dynamics, indicating their applicability for time series and symbolic data.
This study assessed the performance of several entropy estimators for numerical time series and symbolic data on non-trivial one-dimensional dynamical systems whose Kolmogorov–Sinai entropy is known with certified accuracy: recent computer-assisted proof techniques provide rigorous values together with explicit error bounds. We considered four classes of interval maps, including piecewise expanding maps with and without a Markov partition and an intermittent Pomeau–Manneville map, and generated long orbits for each system. We then compared the certified entropy with the output of widely used estimators: Approximate Entropy, Sample Entropy, Permutation Entropy, a symbolic Plug-In estimator of the entropy rate, and the Non-Sequential Recursive Pair Substitution (NSRPS) method (the latter two with Grassberger-type bias correction). Our experiments reveal substantial, dynamics-dependent differences in accuracy and robustness. In particular, Approximate Entropy and the symbolic methods (Plug-In and NSRPS) consistently yielded estimates within the rigorous error bars across all systems, whereas Sample Entropy showed a marked systematic underestimation, and Permutation Entropy exhibited large biases, especially for expanding maps without a Markov partition. The resulting benchmark provides a quantitative testbed for evaluating entropy estimation techniques in deterministic dynamical systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calcagnile et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: