Skip to content

Prove prime-exponent group labels need one rank unit per target (no new κ) - #6008

Merged
Mister-Meeseeks merged 1 commit into
CrocSwap:mainfrom
petalas:research/w9-1022ag-prime-exponent-rank-cut
Oct 28, 2026
Merged

Mister-Meeseeks merged 1 commit into
CrocSwap:mainfrom
petalas:research/w9-1022ag-prime-exponent-rank-cut

Conversation

@petalas

@petalas petalas commented Oct 27, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Result

Claim type: scoped proof with exact finite corroboration. No new κ.

This works in Ali Romman's relaxed group-gate model from #5394 (research/group-subproduct-cover), unchanged. Let G be a group of prime exponent, possibly nonabelian, and K any field. Any diagonal target with d nonidentity entries, repetitions allowed, needs total projector rank at least d. Arbitrary finite clean or dirty scalar workspace and singular or rectangular free maps do not change this. Direct coordinate gates attain d, so the exact rank-one count is d.

This answers #5394's Open next question for these groups. The rank-one count exceeds the relaxed subproduct-cover cost exactly when the cover is shorter than d. The gap can be exponential: the 2^n − 1 nonidentity labels of (C2)^n have cover cost n and rank-one count 2^n − 1.

The proof (PROOF.md) is a representation rank cut: Σ_i rank(ρ(t_i) − I) ≤ Σ_j rank(N_j)·rank(ρ(g_j) − I) for any representation ρ over an extension field. The regular permutation representation over K has rank(ρ(g) − I) = |G|(1 − 1/ord g) in every characteristic. Prime exponent makes that value the same for every nonidentity label.

Evidence and reproduction

verify.py uses only the standard library, is read-only, and does not use the network or Git. It checks:

  • 405 regular defect ranks over Q, F2, F3, F5 and F7, in (C2)^2, (C2)^3, (C2)^4, (C3)^2, C5, the order-27 Heisenberg group, C4 and Q8;
  • 206 seeded random circuits with rectangular and singular free maps and projectors of every rank. Each one checks the augmentation identity, multiplicativity of the entrywise image, and the cut;
  • exact cover costs 2, 3 and 4 for all nonidentity targets of (C2)^2, (C2)^3 and (C3)^2, with the attaining cover and direct words over Q, F2 and F3, plus the 15-label (C2)^4 basis cover;
  • five controls.

From the repository root:

/Users/nick/git/integer-mult-bounds/.venv/bin/python3.12 -I -B -W error research/prime-exponent-rank-cut/verify.py
/Users/nick/git/integer-mult-bounds/.venv/bin/python3.12 -I -O -B -W error research/prime-exponent-rank-cut/verify.py
/Users/nick/git/integer-mult-bounds/.venv/bin/python3.12 -B scripts/research_package.py --package research/prime-exponent-rank-cut
/Users/nick/git/integer-mult-bounds/.venv/bin/python3.12 -B scripts/check_research_commit.py --package research/prime-exponent-rank-cut --check-source-history

Any CPython 3.12 works. Local results on CPython 3.12.15, macOS arm64:

  • both verifier runs print PASS_PRIME_EXPONENT_RANK_CUT regular_checks=405 random_circuits=206 separations=4 controls=5 no_new_kappa (0.51 s and 0.53 s);
  • the package runner prints PASS_REGISTERED_RESEARCH_PACKAGE;
  • the commit check prints PASS_RESEARCH_COMMIT_BYTES.

Limitations and unrun obligations

  • This is an abstract count in an optimistic relaxed model. Physical group gates, scalar maps, source reads, precision, recursive children, hosting and cleanup are not priced. The selected frontier and κ are unchanged.
  • Groups that do not have prime exponent are not settled. For three copies of a² in C4, the regular cut alone gives 2.
  • The cyclic-group remark in PROOF.md section 6 (faithful character, characteristic not dividing m) follows from the same theorem but has no separate finite check.
  • The finite checks corroborate the written proof; they do not replace it. No independent human or formal proof-kernel review is claimed. No receipt file is generated; the verifier's printed JSON is the run record.

Credit

Open next questions

  1. For groups that do not have prime exponent, is the rank-one count always at least the number of nonidentity entries? The first case is three copies of a² in C4.
  2. Which positive combination of permutation representations gives the best cut for a fixed group and target, for example D8 or Q8 over F2? These cuts are valid in every characteristic.
  3. Does any physically realizable prime-exponent label family have a priced native implementation?

Related open work

CI notes

Head 9ba652f6e10ff296ca467fc69a24246c9a5b91af, run https://github.com/CrocSwap/integer-mult-bounds/actions/runs/40585468960.

…each

Answers the four-or-more-target question of research/group-subproduct-cover
for groups of prime exponent, over every field, with a representation rank
cut and exact finite corroboration. No new kappa.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants