Repository navigation
Shrunk lifted frames with saturated deferral: conditional κ = 1.10591581647e-4 - #125
GamingPuzzled wants to merge 7 commits into
Conversation
…78e-5 Under PR104's opposite-bank rule every residual is one child, so deferred readouts pay on both networks. Bit: Swapnil Jain's round-seven deferred word, unchanged (stopped saving 1.2402e-4). Complex: PR104's h=24 network with lifted binary frames and deferred readouts on 8,893 of 44,918 roles (8.58628e-5). Replay with arbitrary scratch, exact F2 frame checks, exact moments and the 47-constraint assembly give kappa = 429239/5000000000. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…0591581647e-4 On PR114's saturated deferred construction over PR117's immutable DAG, one forward pass replaces a lifted frame by the minimal nondegenerate span of its label and predecessor frames whenever that merges increments of the role chains holding it. 16,031 frames shrink; roles, matching, rank mass and 4,706 deferred readouts are unchanged. Complex saving rises from 109305097/10^12 to 110616162/10^12, giving kappa 110591581647/10^15. All PR114 checks are retained: arbitrary-scratch replays, exact F2 chain nesting and nondegeneracy on the shrunk frames, the independent literal reflection audit, exact moments, 47 constraints and 7 margins. A new control rejects PR114's unshrunk profile at the new saving. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
First-time contributor here, so upstream workflows are waiting for maintainer approval. The same workflows already ran on the fork at this head:
Could a maintainer approve the workflow runs? Thanks. |
|
Thank you @GamingPuzzled. This contribution is now recorded on main in the scoped reconciliation review and contributor credits. Contribution: Shrink to the minimal nondegenerate span inside a successor frame. Review and limits: Exact-head CI evidence; recomputed profile and fixed target-frame boundaries required. The complete original source, proof/research notes, notices and relevant replay/CI evidence are retained through the pinned source archive. The review distinguishes fresh runs, exact-head historical CI and prior integration evidence. Closing this historical PR as reconciled; its obsolete headline does not replace the current selected bound, and draft/retracted claims retain their explicit qualifications. Reviewed head: |
Status: the package verifier and full repository verification ("Verify research artifacts") pass on the fork; see the comment below. The inherited
cyclic-deferredcheck fails on #114's own head too.Under the inherited stopped-product, endpoint, analytic and fixed-tape hypotheses,
κ = 110591581647/10¹⁵ = 1.10591581647×10⁻⁴
The complex side still binds.
This builds on eumemic's updated #114 (
7dfa16edfa5d6452f2b10dadcbef20d26222827e) and leaves its construction unchanged:One step is new: shrunk lifted frames.
Idea. #110's frame contract for an addition x asks for a nondegenerate U_x with label(x) + Σ U_pred ⊆ U_x ⊆ lifted kernel. U_x must also lie in every successor frame. The lift takes the largest choice, but nothing requires it. Each role pays one child per strict increase along its frame chain, and t·log(m/t) is subadditive. Increments of 1 and 2 dominated the complex moment, so it is cheaper to delay an increase and merge it into the next one.
Construction. One forward pass in chronological order considers the minimal span Lb_x = label(x) + Σ U_pred. It replaces U_x by Lb_x only when all of these hold:
Deferral candidates then use the shrunk start frames.
W, the rank mass 71,647,349,312 and the maximum child 574 are unchanged. Only the split of role chains into children changes. All of these stay paid:
The bit supplier is unchanged: Swapnil Jain's round-seven word, with stopped saving 1240189553/10¹³.
Checks. Run
python3 research/shrunk-frames/verify.py. It regenerates the package in a temporary tree, and it passes locally. It covers:Scope. This is a finite conditional witness. The finite checks show the shrunk frames meet #110's stated frame contract. They are not a new general argument. All inherited transfer hypotheses remain assumptions. No claim is made of global optimality or a practical speedup.
Orthogonality. The shrink step is independent of #124's dead-slot recycling and #122's terminal-accumulator elimination. Both of those change roles rather than frames, so a composition may give more. It has not been tested.
Credit: eumemic (#117 producer; #114 saturated placement, reflection audit and scalar charge); Avi Eisenberg/ikeboy (#110, #62); Rohan Arun (#111/#113/#116/#118); icekylinx (#104/#115); Swapnil Jain (round-seven words, lifted frames, deferred readouts); Zhihao Chen/jacklightChen; Aurel Prosz/Paureel; RaD/hipotures; Douglas Colkitt; OpenAI and all inherited contributors. Original licenses and notices remain. The shrunk-frame step was prepared by Joel Pulikkan with Anthropic Claude assistance.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code