Skip to content

Prove one shared-arena CRT axis fits the evaluator allowance. - #4650

Merged
Mister-Meeseeks merged 1 commit into
CrocSwap:mainfrom
unpaidmoon:cursor/crt-arena-root-axis-65d8
Oct 22, 2026
Merged

Mister-Meeseeks merged 1 commit into
CrocSwap:mainfrom
unpaidmoon:cursor/crt-arena-root-axis-65d8

Conversation

@unpaidmoon

@unpaidmoon unpaidmoon commented Oct 22, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Change and mathematical scope

Scoped counting proof. No new κ. The selected conditional result stays 60403/20000000 = 0.00302015. PR #4100 is not accepted.

research/crt-uniform-evaluator proves the per-table bound E(p, ell) <= 2^{4 ell}(p+2)^{16} with constant 1, and leaves open a root-axis query whose every logical access scans one shared arena. This package prices that schedule for one axis.

For every integer p >= 2 and 1 <= h <= ell <= p, the axis pays the pinned one-axis CRT bill 65536 q^3 + 1024 q ell^3 + 1024 q^2 (q = p+2) and compiles four rotation networks on the PR #4192 arena (N = 2^h wires, record width w = 4q). Each tape action may also pay one schoolbook product of two w-bit words. The sum is at most 2^{4 ell} q^{16}.

The same charge on all 8q axes exceeds the allowance at p = 2, ell = 2, h = 2: 1241895956864 > 1099511627776. The per-table proof already covers that batch by a different scan.

At the one-axis corner p = 2, ell = 2, h = 2, U = 38809248652 and E = 1099511627776, so 28 U <= E < 29 U.

Reservoir placement, the ordinary callee, sparse repair, native execution and the outer theorem remain open. The arena simulator is not executed.

Task and overlap

Validation

Python 3.12, standard library only, from the repository root:

python3.12 -B scripts/research_package.py --package research/crt-arena-root-axis --check-only
python3.12 -B scripts/research_package.py --package research/crt-arena-root-axis
python3.12 -B scripts/check_research_commit.py --package research/crt-arena-root-axis --check-source-history

All three passed locally. verify.py prints PASS_CRT_ARENA_ROOT_AXIS. It checks the inductions, the vendor SHA256, the corner witnesses 38809248652 and 1099511627776, the 32-axis excess, and a dropped-sentence control. The optimized (-O) replay also passed.

The universal statement is the induction in PROOF.md, not the finite box. The box h = 1..8 only checks that the corner has the largest ratio there.

Not run: the PR #4192 simulator, the retained Beneš compiler, Lean, and Docker.

Credit

Cinna Davis supplies the CRT construction and the shape of E(p, ell). research/crt-uniform-evaluator supplies the one-axis bill, the rotation tariff and the open question. ToikY's PR #4192 supplies the arena census and tape invoice; the vendored proof is unmodified. PR #4311 records the evaluator row this question continues.

Prepared by unpaidmoon with substantial Cursor Grok assistance. Apache-2.0.

Open next questions

  1. Does a word-level scalar inventory bring all 8(p+2) axes inside the same allowance? The schoolbook-per-action majorant does not, at p = 2, ell = 2. First replace 8 w^2 per tape action by the per-record comparisons in PR Audit uniform Beneš compiler with charged sequential arena scans #4192 §2. Blocked here because that inventory is not this theorem.
  2. With one arena axis inside E, do reservoir placement and the ordinary callee still fit? First step is the H >= G comparison named by the evaluator package. Placement remains PR Audit CRT reservoir placement and split-axis coordinate descriptors #4174.

Workflow feedback (optional)

The #4311 shortest list is the ordered source for this card, and each closed row's open question is the next eligible item. A one-line successor on the map would keep that attachment after the row itself is audited.

The PR CrocSwap#4192 scan, with one schoolbook product per tape action and the one-axis CRT bill, stays inside 2^{4 ell}(p+2)^{16}. The same charge on all 8(p+2) axes exceeds that allowance at p=2, ell=2.

Co-authored-by: unpaidmoon <unpaidmoon@users.noreply.github.com>
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.

3 participants