On the frequency and severity of interstate wars
Aaron Clauset

TL;DR
This paper revisits Richardson's hypothesis on conflict patterns, confirming that the frequency of wars follows a Poisson process and their severity follows a power-law distribution, using modern data and statistical methods.
Contribution
It provides updated empirical evidence supporting Richardson's original claims with rigorous analysis and discusses implications for understanding conflict mechanisms.
Findings
War frequency follows a Poisson process.
War severity follows a power-law distribution.
Supports Richardson's original hypotheses with modern data.
Abstract
Lewis Fry Richardson argued that the frequency and severity of deadly conflicts of all kinds, from homicides to interstate wars and everything in between, followed universal statistical patterns: their frequency followed a simple Poisson arrival process and their severity followed a simple power-law distribution. Although his methods and data in the mid-20th century were neither rigorous nor comprehensive, his insights about violent conflicts have endured. In this chapter, using modern statistical methods and data, we show that Richardson's original claims appear largely correct, with a few caveats. These facts place important constraints on our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that produce individual wars and periods of peace, and shed light on the persistent debate about trends in conflict.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence · Political Conflict and Governance
