pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.00407 · v3 · submitted 2026-04-01 · 🧮 math.OC · math.PR

A Musielak-Orlicz approach for modeling uncertainties in long-memory processes

Hidekazu Yoshioka This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 21:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.OC math.PR
keywords Musielak-Orlicz spacessupOU processeslong-memory processesuncertainty modelingcumulant boundsLevy measuresreversion measuresenvironmental modeling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Musielak-Orlicz spaces enable well-posed optimization of cumulant bounds for supOU processes under uncertainty in reversion and Levy measures, where Kullback-Leibler divergence fails.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops a framework for handling uncertainties in supOU processes, models for long-memory phenomena, by representing those uncertainties as distortions to the reversion and Levy measures. It defines state-dependent divergence functions on Musielak-Orlicz spaces to create uncertainty sets and then solves optimization problems that yield the upper and lower bounds on the cumulants within those sets. The approach supplies sufficient conditions that guarantee the optimization problems remain well-posed. An application to streamflow discharge modeling illustrates how the method works in practice.

Core claim

The paper establishes that state-dependent divergence functions defined on Musielak-Orlicz spaces allow formulation of optimization problems whose solutions give the sharpest upper and lower bounds on cumulants of supOU processes when the reversion and Levy measures are allowed to vary inside a prescribed uncertainty set, and that these problems admit solutions under stated conditions while classical divergences such as Kullback-Leibler do not.

What carries the argument

State-dependent divergence functions on Musielak-Orlicz spaces that define uncertainty sets for the optimization problems determining cumulant bounds.

If this is right

  • Upper and lower cumulant bounds become computable for any supOU process whose uncertainty set satisfies the given conditions.
  • Sufficient conditions guarantee existence of solutions to the optimization problems.
  • The same construction applies directly to environmental time-series modeling such as streamflow discharge.
  • The framework supplies a consistent way to propagate measure uncertainty into cumulant estimates without relying on Kullback-Leibler divergence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same divergence construction could be tested on other superposition-based long-memory models to check whether the well-posedness carries over.
  • Numerical solution schemes for the resulting infinite-dimensional optimizations would be needed before routine use in large-scale forecasting.
  • Tighter cumulant bounds may improve downstream risk calculations in hydrology or finance when reversion and jump intensities are only partially known.

Load-bearing premise

Uncertainties in supOU processes can be represented as distortions in reversion and Levy measures such that state-dependent divergence functions on Musielak-Orlicz spaces produce well-posed optimization problems for cumulant bounds.

What would settle it

A concrete supOU process and uncertainty set for which the resulting optimization problem either becomes ill-posed or returns infinite cumulant bounds would falsify the claim that the Musielak-Orlicz construction resolves the difficulties.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.00407 by Hidekazu Yoshioka.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Discharge data at Kazarashi station. Red circles represent the time points with missing data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Autocorrelation function (ACF) at Kazarashi station. The black curve represents the empirical ACF, and the blue curve represents the theoretical ACF. 4.2 Computational setting We compute the optimization problems in the Upper- and Lower-bound cases for different  . We first use the following alpha divergence function: ( ( ) ( ) ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )( ( ) ) 11 ,, 1 r x r x w r r x w r rr     − − − = −… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Homogeneous ( w  is replaced by 1 and  by a constant) divergence function  = ( x) for  = 2.5i ( i = 0,1,2,...,10 ) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Convex divergence  = ( y) of the homogeneous  in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Computed variance (Var) (m6 /s2 ) values of the distorted supOU processes for different values of  in Upper-bound case (curves) and Lower-bound case (circles). Colors represent   2.5 (red),   4.0 (green),   5.0 (blue), increasing  (magenta), and decreasing  (sky blue) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Computed  = ˆ (m6 /s2 ) values of the distorted supOU processes for different values of  in Upper-bound and Lower-bound cases. Same color legend as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Computed  = ˆ (m3 /s) values of the distorted supOU processes for different values of  in Upper-bound and Lower-bound cases. Same color legends as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Computed *  in Upper-bound case with increasing and decreasing  : (a) increasing with  =100 , (b) decreasing with  =100 , (c) increasing with  = 6.31 , (d) decreasing with  = 6.31 , (e) increasing with  = 0.1 , (f) decreasing with  = 0.1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Computed *  in Lower bound case with increasing and decreasing  : (a) increasing with  =100 , (b) decreasing with  =100 , (c) increasing with  = 6.31 , (d) decreasing with  = 6.31 , (e) increasing with  = 0.1 , (f) decreasing with  = 0.1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: One-year ( 0 8760 t (h)) sample paths of the discharge X (m3 /s) on the (a) ordinary and (b) common logarithmic scales: the benchmark case (green), Upper-bound case with  = 0.631 (blue), and Lower-bound case with  = 0.631 (red) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison of the PDFs of streamflow discharge X (m/s3 ) among the empirical data and computational results on (a) ordinary scale and (b) common logarithmic scale: empirical data (gray), benchmark case (black), Lower-bound case with  = 0.631 (red), Lower-bound case with  = 0.159 (green), Upper-bound case with  = 0.159 (blue), and Upper-bound case with  = 0.631 (magenta) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of the PDFs in the common logarithmic scale for durations (h) of the high-flow periods, where circles and curves represent empirical and fitted results, respectively: (a) Benchmark case, (b) Lower-bound case with  = 0.631 , (c) Lower-bound case with  = 0.159 , (d) Upper-bound case with  = 0.159 , (e) Upper-bound case with  = 0.631 . Color legends represent thr X =10 (m3 /s) (black), thr X =… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Comparison of the PDFs on the common logarithmic scale for durations of the low-flow periods, where circles and curves represent empirical and fitted results, respectively. The legends are the same as those in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper proposes a novel mathematical framework for modeling uncertainties in supOU processes, a common model for long-memory phenomena. We address uncertainties as distortions in reversion and Levy measures, evaluating them simultaneously via state-dependent divergence functions on Musielak-Orlicz spaces. The core of our approach involves solving optimization problems to determine the upper- and lower-bounds of cumulants under a prescribed uncertainty set. Notably, we demonstrate that while classical measures like Kullback-Leibler divergence fail in this context, Musielak-Orlicz spaces effectively resolve these issues. Along with providing sufficient conditions for the well-posedness of these optimizations, we demonstrate the framework's practical utility through a water environmental application, modeling streamflow discharge. This work offers both a theoretical advancement and a robust tool for long-memory process analysis.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a framework for modeling uncertainties in supOU processes by representing them as distortions in the reversion and Lévy measures. These uncertainties are quantified simultaneously via state-dependent divergence functions defined on Musielak-Orlicz spaces. The central technical step is the formulation and solution of optimization problems that yield upper and lower bounds on cumulants under a prescribed uncertainty set. The manuscript asserts that the Kullback-Leibler divergence fails to produce well-posed problems in this setting while the Musielak-Orlicz construction succeeds, supplies sufficient conditions guaranteeing well-posedness, and illustrates the method on a streamflow-discharge application.

Significance. If the well-posedness conditions and the claimed superiority over KL divergence are rigorously established, the work supplies a concrete, application-oriented tool for bounding cumulants of long-memory processes under model uncertainty. The streamflow example indicates immediate relevance to environmental modeling, and the provision of explicit sufficient conditions for the optimization problems is a positive feature that could facilitate adoption by practitioners.

minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract states that 'sufficient conditions for the well-posedness of these optimizations' are supplied; the introduction or the statement of the main theorem should explicitly list or reference these conditions so that readers can locate them without searching the entire text.
  2. In the streamflow application, the manuscript should report the concrete data source, the size of the uncertainty set, and quantitative comparison (e.g., bound widths or out-of-sample performance) against at least one classical divergence measure to substantiate the practical utility claim.
  3. Notation for the state-dependent divergence function and the Musielak-Orlicz modular should be introduced once with a clear definition before being used in the optimization formulation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and positive assessment of our manuscript. We are pleased that the significance of the Musielak-Orlicz framework for bounding cumulants in uncertain supOU processes is recognized, along with its relevance to applications such as streamflow modeling. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper introduces a framework for bounding cumulants of supOU processes under measure distortions using state-dependent divergences on Musielak-Orlicz spaces, supplies sufficient conditions for well-posedness of the resulting optimization problems, and contrasts this with the failure of Kullback-Leibler divergence. The central claims rest on standard existence arguments from Orlicz-space theory and supOU process properties rather than any reduction of the bounds to quantities defined by the same optimization, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations. No equation or step equates an output to its input by construction, and the derivation remains independent of the target results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so no concrete free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted; the approach appears to rely on standard optimization and functional-analysis concepts without new postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5426 in / 1239 out tokens · 60188 ms · 2026-05-13T21:37:00.793977+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Beran, J., Feng, Y., Ghosh, S., Kulik, R. (2013). Long-Memory Processes. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    Lanoiselée, Y., Pagnini, G., & Wyłomańska, A. (2025). Super-resolved anomalous diffusion: deciphering the joint distribution of anomalous exponent and diffusion coefficient. Physical Review Letters, 135(13), 137101. https://doi.org/10.1103/y5pn-5ynd

    work page doi:10.1103/y5pn-5ynd 2025

  3. [3]

    M., & Quinones, R

    Montes, R. M., & Quinones, R. A. (2025). Early detection of sea lice epidemic transitions and changes in long-term abundance levels in salmon farming areas. Aquaculture, 603, 742385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2025.742385

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2025.742385 2025

  4. [4]

    Intelligent parameter identification for the Black -Scholes system driven by mixed fractional Brownian motion

    Zhao, X., & Hou, W. Intelligent parameter identification for the Black -Scholes system driven by mixed fractional Brownian motion. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 207, 118022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2026.118022

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2026.118022 2026

  5. [5]

    Laskin, N. (2024). A new approach to constructing probability distributions of fractional counting processes. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 186, 115268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115268

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115268 2024

  6. [6]

    Balagula, Y., Baimel, D., & Aharon, I. (2025). Comparing time series and neural network models of long memory for electricity price forecasting. Results in Engineering, 108465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.108465

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2025.108465 2025

  7. [7]

    M., El-Beltagy, M., Radwan, A

    Elnady, S. M., El-Beltagy, M., Radwan, A. G., & Fouda, M. E. (2025). A comprehensive survey of fractional gradient descent methods and their convergence analysis. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 194, 116154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2025.116154

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2025.116154 2025

  8. [8]

    Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E. (2001). Superposition of Ornstein –Uhlenbeck type processes. Theory of Probability & Its Applications, 45(2), 175 -194. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0040585X97978166

    work page doi:10.1137/s0040585x97978166 2001

  9. [9]

    E., & Stelzer, R

    Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., & Stelzer, R. (2011). Multivariate supOU processes. https://doi.org/10.1214/10 -AAP690

    work page doi:10.1214/10 2011

  10. [10]

    S., & Rosinski, J

    Rajput, B. S., & Rosinski, J. (1989). Spectral representations of infinitely divisible processes. Probability Theory and Rela ted Fields, 82(3), 451-487. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00339998

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00339998 1989

  11. [11]

    Chen, W., & Huang, S. (2025). A novel detection approach of bifurcation -induced tipping points with generalized Ornstein - Uhlenbeck process in finance. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 201, 117257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2025.117257

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2025.117257 2025

  12. [12]

    Gu, A., He, X., Chen, S., & Yao, H. (2023). Optimal investment -consumption and life insurance strategy with mispricing and model ambiguity. Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 25(3), 77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11009 -023-10051- 0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11009 2023

  13. [14]

    Computer Graphics Forum 31, 2pt2 (2012), 519–528

    Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., & Stelzer, R. (2013). The multivariate supOU stochastic volatility model. Mathematical Finance: An International Journal of Mathematics, Statistics and Financial Economics, 23(2), 275 -296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9965.2011.00494.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1467- 2013

  14. [15]

    Yoshioka, H. (2021). Fitting a superposition of Ornstein –Uhlenbeck process to time series of discharge in a perennial river environment. The Proceedings of ANZIAM, 63, C84 -C96. https://doi.org/10.21914/anziamj.v63.16985

    work page doi:10.21914/anziamj.v63.16985 2021

  15. [16]

    Yoshioka, H. (2025). Superposition of interacting stochastic processes with memory and its application to migrating fish counts. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 192, 115911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115911

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115911 2025

  16. [17]

    Kovtun, A., Leonenko, N., & Pepelyshev, A. (2025). Singular properties of high -order spectral densities of supOU processes. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 109459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2025.109459

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2025.109459 2025

  17. [18]

    Grahovac, D., & Kevei, P. (2025). Tail behavior and almost sure growth rate of superpositions of Ornstein –Uhlenbeck-type processes. Journal of theoretical probability, 38(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10959 -024-01374-w

    work page doi:10.1007/s10959 2025

  18. [19]

    Moser, M., & Stelzer, R. (2011). Tail behavior of multivariate Lévy -driven mixed moving average processes and supOU stochastic volatility models. Advances in Applied Probability, 43(4), 1109-1135. https://doi.org/10.1239/aap/1324045701

    work page doi:10.1239/aap/1324045701 2011

  19. [20]

    N., & Pepelyshev, A

    Leonenko, N. N., & Pepelyshev, A. (2026). Simulation of supOU processes with specified marginal distribution and correlation function. Modern Stochastics: Theory and Applications. Published online. https://doi.org/10.15559/25-VMSTA291

    work page doi:10.15559/25-vmsta291 2026

  20. [21]

    Barndorff-Nielsen, O.E., Benth, F.E., & Veraart, A.E.D. (2018). Ambit Stochastics. Springer, Cham

    work page 2018

  21. [22]

    Behme, A., Chong, C., & Klüppelberg, C. (2015). Superposition of COGARCH processes. Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 125(4), 1426 -1469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spa.2014.11.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.spa.2014.11.004 2015

  22. [23]

    Yoshioka, H. (2026). Theoretical and computational investigations of superposed interacting affine and more complex processes. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 245, 628 -654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2026.01.013

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2026.01.013 2026

  23. [24]

    Luo, H., Yang, Q., Mazloff, M., Nerger, L., & Chen, D. (2023). The impacts of optimizing model-dependent parameters on the Antarctic sea ice data assimilation. Geophysical Research Letters, 50(22), e2023GL105690. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL105690

    work page doi:10.1029/2023gl105690 2023

  24. [25]

    Shao, Y., & Si, W. (2021). Degradation modeling with long-term memory considering measurement errors. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 72(1), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1109/TR.2021.3125958

    work page doi:10.1109/tr.2021.3125958 2021

  25. [26]

    Liu, N., Qian, L., Yan, D., Hu, W., & Hong, M. (2024). A nonlinear dynamical model for monthly runoff forecasting in situations of small samples. Mathematical Geosciences, 56(3), 639 -659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11004-023-10099-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s11004-023-10099-1 2024

  26. [27]

    Ma, C., & Yuan, N. (2025). Exploring land surface air temperature changes: a detailed trend analysis through the lens of long - term memory. Climate Dynamics, 63(8), 295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-025-07791-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s00382-025-07791-9 2025

  27. [28]

    Dyson, M., & Stemler, T. (2025). Improving forecasts of imperfect models using piecewise stochastic processes. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0242061

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0242061 2025

  28. [29]

    P., & Souganidis, P

    Hansen, L. P., & Souganidis, P. (2025). Stochastic responses and marginal valuation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(48), e2520857122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2520857122

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2520857122 2025

  29. [30]

    Yoshioka, H., & Yoshioka, Y. (2024). Generalized divergences for statistical evaluation of uncertainty in long -memory processes. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 182, 114627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.114627

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2024.114627 2024

  30. [31]

    Yoshioka, H., Tomobe, H., & Yoshioka, Y. (2024). Orlicz risks for assessing stochastic streamflow environments: a static optimization approach. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 38(1), 233 -250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477 -023-02561-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s00477 2024

  31. [32]

    Strati, F. (2025). Risk measures on Musielak -Orlicz spaces: A state -dependent perspective for insurance. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 103174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2025.103174

    work page doi:10.1016/j.insmatheco.2025.103174 2025

  32. [33]

    Chlebicka, I., Gwiazda, P., Åšwierczewska -Gwiazda, A., WrÃblewska-KamiÅ„ska, A. (2021). Partial Differential Equations in Anisotropic Musielak-Orlicz. Springer, Cham

    work page 2021

  33. [34]

    Sason, I., & Verdú, S. (2016). f-divergence Inequalities. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 62(11), 5973 -6006. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2016.2603151 42

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2016.2603151 2016

  34. [35]

    Ben-Tal, A., & Teboulle, M. (2007). An old -new concept of convex risk measures: the optimized certainty equivalent. Mathematical Finance, 17(3), 449 -476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9965.2007.00311.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1467-9965.2007.00311.x 2007

  35. [36]

    Fröhlich, C., & Williamson, R. C. (2023). Tailoring to the tails: Risk measures for fine -grained tail sensitivity. Transactions on Machine Learning Research. https://openreview.net/pdf?id=UntUoeLwwu

    work page 2023

  36. [37]

    A., Grabarnik, G

    Rubshtein, BZ. A., Grabarnik, G. Y., & Muratov, M. A., Pashkova, Y.S. (2016). Foundations of Symmetric Spaces of Measurable Functions. Developments in Mathematics. Springer, Cham

    work page 2016

  37. [38]

    J., & Rosazza Gianin, E

    Bellini, F., Laeven, R. J., & Rosazza Gianin, E. (2018). Robust return risk measures. Mathematics and Financial Economics, 12(1), 5-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11579-017-0188-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11579-017-0188-x 2018

  38. [39]

    J., & Gianin, E

    Bellini, F., Laeven, R. J., & Gianin, E. R. (2021). Dynamic robust Orlicz premia and Haezendonck –Goovaerts risk measures. European Journal of Operational Research, 291(2), 438 -446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.08.049

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2019.08.049 2021

  39. [40]

    Chudziak, J., & Rela, P. (2025a). The Orlicz premium principle under uncertainty. Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matemáticas, 119(4), 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398 -025-01778-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s13398

  40. [41]

    Chudziak, J., & Rela, P. (2025b). On supertranslativity of the Orlicz premium principle. Aequationes mathematicae, 99(6), 2549-2563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00010 -025-01207-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s00010

  41. [42]

    Ito, K., & Kashima, K. (2024). Risk -sensitive control as inference with Rényi divergence. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37, 71381 -71413. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/file/836cf992a71f7a0bda218c180f942902 -Paper-Conference.pdf

    work page 2024

  42. [43]

    Póczos, B., & Schneider, J. (2011). On the Estimation of α-Divergences. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pp. 609 -617. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v15/poczos11a/poczos11a.pdf

    work page 2011

  43. [44]

    Boyd, S., & Vandenberghe, L. (2004). Convex optimization. Cambridge University Press

    work page 2004

  44. [45]

    Chen, B., Chen, X., Zhang, Z., & Sun, H. (2025). Derivation and analysis of spatial variability in master recession curves wi th mixed effects model. Journal of Hydrology, 662, 133853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.133853

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.133853 2025

  45. [46]

    Gao, M., Wang, Z., Chen, X., Dong, J., & Singh, S. K. (2026). The key drivers of streamflow recession variability and their implications for robust parameterization of recession processes. Hydrological Sciences Journal. Published Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2025.2593328

    work page doi:10.1080/02626667.2025.2593328 2026

  46. [47]

    Zhang, R., Bu, Q., Chen, X., & Liu, J. (2025). Can storage -discharge characteristics of karst matrix system quantified through recession analysis be reliable?. Journal of Hydrology, 648, 132378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132378

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132378 2025

  47. [48]

    Boros, D., Borbás, E., Darougi, A., Kovács, J., & Márkus, L. (2025). A Fractional Process with Jumps for Modeling Karstic Spring Discharge Data. Mathematics, 13(18), 2928. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13182928

    work page doi:10.3390/math13182928 2025

  48. [49]

    Devò, P., Basso, S., & Marani, M. (2025). Estimation of extreme floods using a statistical and conceptual model of the hydrological response. Water Resources Research, 61(5), e2024WR038667. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR038667

    work page doi:10.1029/2024wr038667 2025

  49. [50]

    E., Ronoh, E

    Houénafa, S. E., Ronoh, E. K., Johnson, O., & Moore, S. E. (2025). Lévy -induced stochastic differential equation models in rainfall–runoff systems for assessing extreme hydrological event risks. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 39(4), 1537-1554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-025-02931-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s00477-025-02931-3 2025

  50. [51]

    Fasen, V., & Klüppelberg, C. (2007). Extremes of supOU processes. In Stochastic analysis and applications: The Abel Symposium 2005, pp. 339 -359. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978 -3-540-70847-6_14

    work page doi:10.1007/978 2007

  51. [52]

    Dommel, P., & Pichler, A. (2021). Convex risk measures based on divergence. Pure and Applied Functional Analysis, 6(6), 1157-1181. http://yokohamapublishers.jp/online2/oppafa/vol6/p1157.html

    work page 2021

  52. [53]

    Grabchak, M., & Saba, S. (2025). On approximations of subordinators in Lp and the simulation of tempered stable distributions. Statistics and Computing, 35(3), 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-025-10586-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11222-025-10586-x 2025

  53. [54]

    Zhu, Y., & Wang, L. (2026). Dynamics of a stochastic SIS model driven by Markovian switching and Lévy jump with heavy tailed increments. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 202, 117552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2025.117552

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2025.117552 2026

  54. [55]

    Chewi, S. (2025). Lectures on Optimization. Version May 6, 2025. https://chewisinho.github.io/opt_notes_final.pdf

    work page 2025

  55. [56]

    Diakonikolas, J., & Jordan, M. I. (2021). Generalized momentum -based methods: A Hamiltonian perspective. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 31(1), 915 -944. https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1322716

    work page doi:10.1137/20m1322716 2021

  56. [57]

    Xie, Z., Yin, W., & Wen, Z. (2025). ODE -Based Learning to Optimize: Z. Xie et al. Mathematical Programming. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107 -025-02303-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s10107 2025

  57. [58]

    Yoshioka, H. (2024). Modeling stationary, periodic, and long memory processes by superposed jump -driven processes. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 188, 115357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115357

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115357 2024

  58. [59]

    Iwata, K., & Sugita, S. (1990). The distribution of Dezukuri in Myoudani District. Ishikawa Prefecture Hakusan Nature Conservation Center Research Report, 17, 61-64. https://www.pref.ishikawa.lg.jp/hakusan/publish/report/documents/report17 - 6.pdf (in Japanese with English Abstract)

    work page 1990

  59. [60]

    Tanaka, T., Kobayashi, K., & Tachikawa, Y. (2021). Simultaneous flood risk analysis and its future change among all the 109 class-A river basins in Japan using a large ensemble climate simulation database d4PDF. Environmental Research Letters, 16(7), 074059. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abfb2b

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abfb2b 2021

  60. [61]

    Chen, J., Sayama, T., Yamada, M., Tanaka, T., & Sugawara, Y. (2025). Projecting multiscale river flood changes across Japan at+ 2 C and+ 4 C climates. Earth's Future, 13(5), e2024EF005884. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024EF005884

    work page doi:10.1029/2024ef005884 2025

  61. [62]

    Abiko, K., & Taniguchi, K. (2026). Runoff analysis in the upper Tedori River basin considering changes in rainfall and snowfall under global warming. Japanese Journal of JSCE, 82(16), 25 -16130. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscejj.25-16130 (in Japanese with English Abstract)

    work page doi:10.2208/jscejj.25-16130 2026

  62. [63]

    Yoshioka, H., & Yoshioka, Y. (2025). Non-Markovian superposition process model for stochastically describing concentration– discharge relationship. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 199, 116715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2025.116715

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2025.116715 2025

  63. [64]

    Calvani, G., Carbonari, C., & Solari, L. (2022). Stability analysis of submerged vegetation patterns in rivers. Water Resourc es Research, 58(8), e2021WR031901. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR031901

    work page doi:10.1029/2021wr031901 2022

  64. [65]

    Latella, M., Notti, D., Baldo, M., Giordan, D., & Camporeale, C. (2024). Short -term biogeomorphology of a gravel -bed river: Integrating remote sensing with hydraulic modelling and field analysis. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 49(3), 1156 -

    work page 2024

  65. [66]

    https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5760

    work page doi:10.1002/esp.5760

  66. [67]

    Nakamura, T., Maruyama, T., & Watanabe, S. (2001). Population Increase of the Fluvial Japanese Charr Salvelinus leucomaenis after Fishing Prohibition. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi, 67(1), 105 -107. https://doi.org/10.2331/suisan.67.105 (in Japanese). 43

    work page doi:10.2331/suisan.67.105 2001

  67. [68]

    Huang, J., Shao, H., Gao, F., Song, J., & He, G. (2025). A data -driven prediction -decision framework for improving the resilience of hydropower systems under drought disasters. Annals of Operations Research. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479 -025-06962-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s10479 2025

  68. [69]

    Yoshioka, H., Yoshioka, Y., & Tsujimura, M. (2025). Tractable fish growth models considering individual differences with an application to the fish Plecoglossus altivelis . Applied Mathematical Modelling, 148, 116217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2025.116217

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apm.2025.116217 2025

  69. [70]

    Fatoorehchi, H., & Fosbøl, P. L. (2026). On the Maximum Horizontal Distance of a Matrix’s Eigenvalues from the Imaginary Axis: A New Criterion for Control System Stability. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 108258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2025.108258

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jfranklin.2025.108258 2026

  70. [71]

    Walkington, N. J. (2023). Nesterov's method for convex optimization. SIAM Review, 65(2), 539 -562. https://doi.org/10.1137/21M1390037

    work page doi:10.1137/21m1390037 2023