The Economic Singularity: Dimensional Reduction, Invariants, and Stability Analysis of the Financialization Threshold
Mykola Yaremenko · Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications · 10 Jun 2026
Read original sourceOpen access
Where this sits in the debate
- Will AI actually boost productivity and growth? · its finding: it depends (why studies differ)
- Will AI widen inequality? · its finding supports the claim (why studies differ)
- How fast will the impact arrive?
Direction of the finding as read from the abstract by an AI model (AI-written).
Key takeaway AI-written
A theoretical dynamical-systems model of an economy with self-improving AI, financial capital and labour, reduced to three ratios. It finds a tipping point in financial depth per unit of AI capability: above it the economy drifts toward runaway finance ('neofeudalism'), below it AI dominates. The author draws policy recommendations to curb financial feedback loops early.
Abstract
Background: The possibility of an economic singularity---a finite‑time explosion of AI capability, financial capital, and inequality---has been discussed in futurist and economic literature, but endogenous feedback loops between AI, finance, and labour markets remain underexplored. Methods: This paper presents a dimensional reduction of a dynamical systems model of an economy with recursively self‑improving artificial intelligence and financial autocatalysis. By transforming to three economically meaningful ratios---financial depth per AI capability ($x = K_f/A$), AI capital per financial capital ($u = K_{ai}/K_f$), and employment odds ($z = L_p/(1-L_p)$)---the original four‑variable explosive system reduces to a bounded, analytically tractable three‑dimensional system. Results: The reduced model possesses a saddle‑type equilibrium that separates two asymptotic regimes: one in which AI dominates ($x\to0$) and one in which finance explodes ($x\to\infty$, Neofeudalism). The critical financial depth is $x_c = (\lambda+\beta)/\gamma_F$, so that the economy tips into Neofeudalism whenever the initial $x_0 > x_c$. Numerical simulations confirm the saddle structure and the threshold behaviour. Conclusions: The analysis yields sharp policy recommendations: regulate financial autocatalysis to raise the safety threshold, and intervene early to keep the financial‑to‑AI ratio below the critical value. Redistribution alone cannot substitute for structural regulation.
About this publication
Academic journal. Published in an academic journal — typically peer-reviewed before publication, though indexing alone doesn't guarantee review depth.
- Published
- 2026 (4 months ago)
- Citations
- 0 (OpenAlex)
0 citations recorded by OpenAlex — too few 2026 papers in this collection for a fair comparison.
Related by theme, not necessarily by method or conclusion.
- Artificial Intelligence and Institutional Transformation across Regulatory Economic and Knowledge Systems
Journal of Science Engineering Technology and Management Sciences · 2026 - Governing the Ungovernable: Structural Contradictions, Institutional Limitations, and the Constraints of State Authority in AI Regulation in China and the United States
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews · 2026 - Governing the Ungoverned: A Framework for Responsible AI Deployment in Nigeria’s Informal Economy
International Journal Of Recent Trends In Multidisciplinary Research · 2026 - Digitalization, AI Adoption, and MSME Productivity: An Ibn Khaldunian Perspective
Share Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Islam · 2026
Overview assembled automatically from collected metadata. How this site is built.