AccScience Publishing / NSCE / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/NSCE026280029
Cite this article
3
Download
21
Views
Related Info Links
More by Authors Links
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

The bifurcating singularity: A mathematical theory of AI-driven economic transition under financialized capitalism

Mykola Yaremenko1*
Show Less
1 National Technical University of Ukraine, “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, 37, Prospect Beresteiskyi (former Peremohy), Kyiv , Ukraine
Received: 6 July 2026 | Revised: 19 October 2026 | Accepted: 22 October 2026 | Published online: 11 November 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

We develop a mathematical theory of the Economic Singularity—the finite-time threshold transition at which AI-driven growth destabilizes classical economic structures. Extending the hyperbolic-growth framework of Yaremenko (2026), we introduce a four-variable dynamical system: AI capability A(t), governed by ; AI capital Kai(t); financial capital Kf(t) governed by a stochastic differential equation with AI-enhanced returns; and productive labor Lp(t), subject to hyperbolic displacement. We derive a dimensionless threshold parameter Λ(t) = ϕλA(t)/ξ, defined as the ratio of disruption to stabilization forces, together with the crossing time tΛ at which Λ reaches unity. Under baseline parameters the threshold is crossed at tΛ ≈ 10.45 years (2036), with a labor half-life of 3.87 years and 99% displacement at 14.82 years. Because A(t) → ∞ as t → ts, no finite friction can prevent the eventual transition; the policy problem is therefore to delay it and manage its distributional consequences. The elasticity of tΛ with respect to ξ is approximately +0.82, confirming ξ as the dominant single policy lever within the model. We emphasize that all quantitative dates are scenario outcomes conditional on rough parameter estimates, not predictions, and we report global sensitivity analysis and stochastic first-passage distributions to quantify this uncertainty.

Keywords
Economic singularity
Financialization
Threshold transition
Labor displacement
Stochastic differential equations
Hyperbolic growth
AI risk
Optimal control
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Ulam S. Tribute to John von Neumann. Bull Am Math Soc. 1958;64(3, Part 2):1-49. Accessed October 26, 2026. https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1958-64-03/S0002-9904-1958-10189-5/
  2. Good IJ. Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine. In: Advances in Computers. Vol 6. Elsevier; 1966:31-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2458(08)60418-0
  3. Vinge V. The coming technological singularity: how to survive in the post-human era. Whole Earth Rev. 1993;81:88-95.
  4. Kurzweil R. The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. The Viking Press; 2005.
  5. Hanson R. The Age of Em: Work, Love, and Life When Robots Rule the Earth. Oxford University Press; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198754626.001.0001
  6. Tegmark M. Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Alfred A. Knopf; 2017.
  7. Bostrom N. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press; 2014.
  8. Ord T. The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Bloomsbury Publishing; 2020.
  9. Acemoglu D, Restrepo P. The race between man and machine: implications of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment. Am Econ Rev. 2018;108(6):1488-1542. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160696
  10. Autor DH. Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. J Econ Perspect. 2015;29(3):3-30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.3.3
  11. Frey CB, Osborne MA. The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2017;114:254-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
  12. Arntz M, Gregory T, Zierahn U. The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: a comparative analysis. OECD Soc Employ Migr Work Pap. 2016;No. 189. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h56dvq7-en
  13. Acemoglu D, Restrepo P. Automation and new tasks: how technology displaces and reinstates labor. J Econ Perspect. 2019;33(2):3-30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.2.3
  14. Autor D, Salomons A. Is automation labor share-displacing? Productivity growth, employment, and the labor share. Brookings Pap Econ Act. 2018;2018(Spring):1-87. https://doi.org/10.1353/eca.2018.0000
  15. Brynjolfsson E, McAfee A. The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W. W. Norton; 2014.
  16. Krippner GR. Capitalizing on Crisis: The Political Origins of the Rise of Finance. Harvard University Press; 2011.
  17. Piketty T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press; 2014. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674369542
  18. Lazonick W. Profits without prosperity. Harv Bus Rev. 2014;92(9):46-55.
  19. Stockhammer E. Financialisation and the slowdown of accumulation. Camb J Econ. 2004;28(5):719-741. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beh032
  20. Sornette D. Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences: Chaos, Fractals, Selforganization and Disorder: Concepts and Tools. 2nd ed. Springer; 2003.
  21. Taagepera R. A world population growth model: interaction with Earth's carrying capacity and technology in limited space. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2014;82:34-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.009
  22. Modis T. The singularity myth. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2006;73(2):104-112.
  23. Strogatz SH. Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Engineering. 2nd ed. CRC Press; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429492563
  24. Scheffer M, Carpenter S, Foley JA, Folke C, Walker B. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature. 2001;413(6856):591-596. https://doi.org/10.1038/35098000
  25. Ditlevsen PD, Johnsen SJ. Tipping points: early warning and wishful thinking. Geophys Res Lett. 2010;37(19):L19703. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044486
  26. May RM. Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics. Nature. 1976;261(5560):459-467. https://doi.org/10.1038/261459a0
  27. Day RH, Shafer W. Keynesian chaos. J Macroecon. 1985;7(3):277-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/0164-0704(85)90072-2
  28. Yaremenko MI. The economic singularity: core mathematical model. ICCK J Appl Math. 2026;2(3):195-203. https://doi.org/10.62762/JAM.2026.366725
  29. Sevilla J, Heim L, Ho A, Besiroglu T, Hobbhahn M, Villalobos P. Compute trends across three eras of machine learning. In: 2022 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE; 2022:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN55064.2022.9891914
  30. Epoch AI. Announcing Epoch AI's dashboard of key trends and figures in machine learning. Epoch AI; April 12, 2023. Accessed October 26, 2026. https://epoch.ai/blog/announcing-epoch-ais-dashboard-of-key-trends-and-figures-in-machine-learning
  31. Cont R. Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quant Finance. 2001;1(2):223-236. https://doi.org/10.1088/1469-7688/1/2/304
  32. Merton RC. Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model. J Econ Theory. 1971;3(4):373-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(71)90038-X
  33. Black F, Scholes M. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. J Polit Econ. 1973;81(3):637-654. https://doi.org/10.1086/260062
  34. Oberfield E, Raval D. Micro data and macro technology. Econometrica. 2021;89(2):703-732. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA12807
  35. Ljungqvist L, Sargent TJ. Recursive Macroeconomic Theory. 4th ed. MIT Press; 2018.
Share
Back to top
Nonlinear Science and Control Engineering, Published by AccScience Publishing