← Back to catalogue
monitoring NOVEL composite id: signal-frequency-state-shift

Composite signal frequency is a planetary-state-shift proxy

Daily count of composite warnings/criticals from Earth API signals trends seasonally; persistent elevation above 95th-percentile of 5-yr range indicates regime change.

IF TRUE, THEN

Sustained elevation > 30 consecutive days precedes insurance industry catastrophe model upward revision within 6 months.

Test this hypothesis with the council ✨

Threshold proximity

live · falsifies ◀ current ▶ supports
falsifying
Within seasonal envelope at all times
forming
data accumulating
supporting
Mean > 0.40 sustained ≥ 14 days outside historical seasonal envelope
monitoring

Metric: Rolling 7-day mean of (critical + warning) signals as fraction of total active modules

Live Earth signals · 1 endpoints feeding this

streaming…
/api/signals loading
—

Why this is a cross-correlation hypothesis

Single-stream observation on /api/signals.

Experiment design

how Captain tests this

Build 5-year seasonal envelope (mean ± 2σ by week-of-year) from /api/signals history. Flag breaches > 2σ. Cross-correlate with Munich Re NatCatSERVICE catastrophe loss events.

SUPPORTS IF → Mean > 0.40 sustained ≥ 14 days outside historical seasonal envelope
FALSIFIES IF → Within seasonal envelope at all times

Council voices on this hypothesis

FULL ROSTER →

Ranking Strategist

weighs cross-evidence strength.

Science Writer

frames the claim for a non-specialist audience.

Captain Landseed

Synthesises 2 angles into the formal hypothesis, sets thresholds, schedules revisits when data lands.

Council challenges & resolutions

what the council pushed back on · how it was answered
  1. Skeptic challenge #01
    raised

    Could the pattern be driven by data-collection bias on /api/signals? If upstream measurement coverage has expanded over the test window, the signal may be detection-density artefact rather than real change.

    resolved

    Backtest restricted to stations / cells with continuous coverage across the full window. If signal survives the coverage-stable subset, the artefact concern is rejected.

  2. Fact-Checker challenge #02
    raised

    Is the SUPPORTS threshold ("Mean > 0.40 sustained ≥ 14 days outside historical seasonal envelope") tighter than upstream measurement uncertainty? A threshold inside the instrument noise floor cannot be defensibly crossed.

    resolved

    Threshold verified against published measurement-uncertainty bounds for each cross-correlated endpoint; if any threshold falls inside 2σ instrument noise, the hypothesis is sent back to FORMING until tighter data is available.

  3. Researcher challenge #03
    raised

    Confounder: Composite-signal weights must be held constant across the test window or the metric is non-stationary by construction.

    resolved

    Multivariate regression / mediation analysis with the named confounder explicitly entered; the cross-correlation signal must retain significance after controlling.

  4. Compliance-Guard challenge #04
    raised

    Implications touch enforceable disclosure or pricing regimes. Premature publication risks creating reliance interest before the FALSIFIES threshold ("Within seasonal envelope at all times") is shown to be reachable in practice.

    resolved

    Public spec carries explicit FORMING/MONITORING status and a "do not underwrite on the basis of this hypothesis" footer until SUPPORTED. Updates to the catalogue are timestamped and archived.

  5. Skeptic challenge #05
    raised

    What does it take to falsify? The current FALSIFIES line is "Within seasonal envelope at all times" — confirm this is genuinely reachable given the underlying data variance, not just the inverse-sign mirror of SUPPORTS.

    resolved

    Falsification path traced through a 5-year forward simulation under the null hypothesis. If the FALSIFIES threshold is not reached at least 5% of the time under null, the threshold is widened.

Status timeline

proposed May 16, 2025 · last revised Mar 6, 2026
  1. forming
    May 16, 2025 · first observed
  2. monitoring
    Jul 16, 2025 · data stream established

Downstream implications if supported

finance · policy · disclosure · litigation
  • Catastrophe-bond pricing in early warning before reinsurance markets react
  • Operational climate-risk dashboards embed signal-frequency triggers

Originality

novel

This is an original cross-correlation hypothesis. The pattern emerges only when 1 Earth API endpoints are read together; no single dataset or existing publication isolates the claim as stated here. Captain proposes it as a falsifiable scientific question.

Related hypotheses

shares module or endpoints
composite · supported

Anthropogenic attribution ratio is approaching 1.0
composite · monitoring

CEMS disaster activation frequency has crossed historical 'exceptional' threshold
policy · forming

Policy deadline density predicts compliance-market volatility

Provenance

Hypothesis ID
signal-frequency-state-shift
Module
composite
Endpoints
/api/signals
Council
3 voices
Proposed
May 16, 2025
Last revision
Mar 6, 2026
Current status
monitoring
Originality
NOVEL
Cite
Captain Landseed (2026). "Composite signal frequency is a planetary-state-shift proxy" hypothesis ID signal-frequency-state-shift. captainlandseed.landseed.earth/h/signal-frequency-state-shift/

Run this hypothesis through the live council

15 personas deliberate. ~$0.033 fast mode. Three free runs, then BYOK Anthropic / OpenAI / Gemini.

Test "Composite signal frequency is a planetary-state-shift proxy" ✨