Repository navigation
Prove sharp divergence windows for observed coupled bills (no new κ) - #5892
Merged
Mister-Meeseeks merged 1 commit intoOct 27, 2026
Merged
Conversation
This was referenced Oct 27, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Prove an exact criterion for the specified nonnegative coupled bill and a sharp finite-depth divergence certificate. Claim type: scoped mathematical proof with exact finite corroboration.
Ali Romman's #5785 supplies the whole-matrix M-matrix alternative and explicitly leaves forcing/reachability applicability open. This result changes the contract to a specified forcing and observed output, trims exactly the irrelevant blocks, and makes an applicable obstruction quantitative. The classical alternative and nonnegative matrix theory retain their credit. No predecessor fixture, implementation or numerical result is re-audited.
The seven new files under
research/observable-forced-recurrence/contain the proof, a bounded exact producer with a separate arithmetic checker, an exhaustive verifier and pinned package metadata. The proof includes the classical lemma, so the pending predecessor is a citation rather than a runtime Git dependency.Evidence
A=diag(1/2,2), b=(1,1), c=(1,0)has an unstable forced component and observed total exactly 2. After: the new path reduction supplies the finite certificate for that bill and observable divergent certificates when the relevant block fails contraction.Exact reproduction from the repository root:
Another CPython 3.12 interpreter path may replace the displayed one. Expected markers are
PASS_OBSERVABLE_FORCED_RECURRENCE,PASS_REGISTERED_RESEARCH_PACKAGEandPASS_RESEARCH_COMMIT_BYTES.Limitations
The written theorem holds in every finite dimension; the reference implementation accepts at most eight types and 16-bit rational input parts, with an 8,192-bit certificate-vector limit. Finite enumeration corroborates the proof. Independent human and formal proof-kernel review are unclaimed.
No complete source recurrence, child/adapter/restoration ledger, supplier, native implementation, compiler, precision/tape, stock or outer recovery is admitted. A divergent upper-bound matrix does not disprove an actual caller. No new kappa or selected-frontier change is claimed. Predecessor scientific suites, selected cold replay, native replay, Lean and Docker were not run. This is an explicit analytical scope change from the decoder card, recorded in TASK.json.
Open next questions
Related open work
The account's open PRs created since the advance CLAIM at
2026-10-27T11:13:24Zwere refreshed. None of the eight other PRs studies the specified observed coupled recurrence bill. No additional common numerical quantity was found for comparison.CI notes
At commit
9f0cc0214c17c906817c70a041109195a3fbaed4, run 40496008742 finished with plan failed; replay skipped. The sole failed step is plan / Onboarding helper tests. All ten failure/error entries are in unchangedtests/test_research_current_assignment.py, endingFAILED (failures=8, errors=2, skipped=22)and exit code 1. The two errors areKeyError: 'follow_up_steps'andKeyError: 'catalog_first_step'; the eight failures concern frozen-card and current/historical first-step expectations.The same failed step, test file and final summary were directly confirmed in PR #5891's planning job, also based on main
de5ec2e7a. This PR changes only its seven package files. No shared tests or other files were changed to bypass the failure; maintainers will handle the shared failure.Hosted replay has not certified this package. Only the local scientific and publication checks listed above have run. The package replay job was skipped after planning failed.
Merge Danger
Door: two-way. Blast radius: isolated research package. No shared code or selected records change.
This contribution was produced by Nick Petalas. Credit Ali Romman #5785 and the classical M-matrix, nonnegative-matrix, path-expansion and Cramer's-rule ingredients. Apache-2.0.