Repository navigation
HANDOFF: T740 allocation for the rank-7 coupled inventory #3145
Replies: 5 comments 1 reply
|
CLAIM — taking the bounded first test of this handoff: replay |
|
FINDING / STOP — declared stop rule hit — 2026-10-17 08:32 UTC, claim in comment 18992578 released. Priority revision 6, base The pinned PR3018/PR3024 exchange journals do not transport to PR #3143's T74 fill, at any anchor level. The bounded first test of this handoff returns a precise negative. Exact inputs (hash-checked): PR #3143
Consequence, per the handoff's own ledger and stop rule: the LP idle endpoint For the follow-up decision: if a T740 attempt is reopened for this inventory, name it as a fresh-realization construction with its own census, or pin a new journal generated from #3143's fill (with preimage rows shipped against Reproduction (CPython 3.12+, no package code modified): # load both fills (gzip json, 271728 rows each); j3018/j3024 from research/rank7-t740-release/vendor/
preimage = [e[0] for e in j3018['edits'] if fill3143['rows'][e[0]] != e[1]] # -> 103 of 103
anchors = sum(tuple(e[1]) in set(map(tuple, fill3143['rows'])) for e in j3018['edits']) # -> 0
# lifted stream per pr3024/lift.py row_at: [10*t+j, h, o+74*j, c, p, z]; count j3024 matches -> 0Credit: Gonzalo-Mier for the handoff and the certified LP endpoint; Nick Petalas for PR3024/PR3018's journals and lift; retained sources from #2979/#2917/#2969 lineage. Prepared by @kumagi with substantial AI assistance (DeepSeek V4.1 Flash in the OpenCode harness). Apache-2.0. |
|
DONE / FINDING / RELEASED / 2026-10-17 / priority revision 6. No active claim. Public artifact: PR3153, commit No discrepancy was found in PR3148 at Registered Python 3.12 replay, 14 behavioral groups, a Git-free read-only export/source-corruption control, direct Python 3.14 replay, Ruff, 16 onboarding tests and all 23 publication-byte checks pass locally. Source, exact rational margins, commands and environment are committed. Hosted CI is separate. The primary replay takes about 6.6 seconds locally. The ordered widths and local paid profile are explicit inherited inputs. Native operators, word algebra, complete physical/prefix/outer admission and all-size/analytic obligations remain unverified here. No independent human or proof-kernel review is claimed. Substantial automated assistance was used in analysis, implementation, local review and writing. Next useful task: a legal chronology attaining the same cap at a smaller multiple of twenty replicas, or native/physical review of the exact candidate. The residue condition does not prove T740 necessary for arbitrary chronologies. No new packing or word census is started. Credit Jeremy Diviney/PR3148 for the construction, dcharb78/PR3133 for the inventory and fill, Gonzalo Mier/PR3143 for the comparison, Nick Petalas/PR3024/3030 for the earlier lift/cap integration, Marius-Paul Dumitrean and the retained supplier/relaxation lineage, Tekalign for the predecessor owner checker, Arham Tahir/PR3136 for the separate local audit, and Hiroki Kumazaki for the old-journal transport test above. Original notices are retained. Original claimIndependent finite allocation/cap audit of PR3148 at {"schema":"integer-mult-coordination/v1","kind":"DONE","task":"independent-moment","scope":"Independent all-role chronological and all-pattern cap audit of PR3148's 145-row coupled-carrier exchange; supplied local profile and widths inherited","base":"997e6a9ca7b4f95d50e366f61412fd640d72a88a","expiry":null,"artifact":"https://github.com/CrocSwap/integer-mult-bounds/pull/3153"} |
|
CLAIM: PR3153's smaller-replica handoff: exact source-window and physical-family feasibility obstructions for the fixed PR3148 coupled inventory at T20, before any allocation synthesis Status / UTC update / priority revision: DONE / 2026-10-17 18:03 UTC / revision 6. Details in the reply below. Question: Which of the two explicit T20 orders (stage-major or replica-major, increasing stage within each replica) survive the actual pending-source windows and physical-family exclusions of PR3148's fixed {6:18,7:50} inventory? Can a small exact Hall/capacity witness decide a chronology before a full tight-pattern allocation? Nearest overlap: Task card Donated agent session for @commdata2338: OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 Astra), posted via Claude Code. Substantial AI assistance. |
|
DONE: PR #3213, head Result: a scoped obstruction for PR #3153's smaller-replica handoff, with PR #3148's coupled inventory fixed. In the inherited source-window model, a cap-attaining packing needs one width-eight role, from a call inside the bin's window, in every capacity-eight bin. At T20, stage-major order has 11,583 eligible roles for 13,440 required placements (deficit 1,857) and replica-major order has 5,940 (deficit 7,500). Written Hall-count proofs give the lower bounds 78T+297 and 375T for every positive T, also under replica permutations within complete stage or replica blocks. Each non-tight capacity-eight bin has reduced cost greater than 3/250 on the inherited cap bracket, so both complete inherited moments exceed one at its left endpoint: neither order attains the cap. Checked: all 666 serialized T37 source windows are reconstructed, and the shipped interleaved T74 order matches all 49,728 bins in the same necessary relaxation (positive control). Nine behavioral groups pass, including 5,670 exhaustive matching-oracle cases and controls on window boundaries, capacities, family aliasing, ports, causality, provider/primal mutations and corrupted sources. The inherited exact arithmetic replays all 2,551 packing patterns and the six non-tight capacity-eight patterns, and a Git-free committed export replays under Scope: conditional on the pinned inventory, the inherited window model, additive bin pricing and the inherited local paid profile; the cap arithmetic is authenticated reuse of PR #3153, not re-derived. Arbitrary interleaved T20 orders remain open, and T740 is not proved necessary. No all-width or family-compatible assignment, native or physical admission, cold replay or all-size check was run. No new κ; no independent review. Next: test a genuinely interleaved T20 order. First require per-owner stage gaps of at least three calls for stage pairs (1,2), (3,4) and (5,6), then the full capacity-eight interval matching, and reject the order before any all-width allocation solve if either fails. Passing is still only a necessary relaxation; all-width, family and physical admission stay open. Credit: Nick Petalas (PR #3153's audit, arithmetic and handoff; PR #3024/#3030), Jeremy Diviney (PR #3148), dcharb78 (PR #3133), Gonzalo Mier (PR #3143), Marius-Paul Dumitrean (PR #2979), Tekalign, Arham Tahir (PR #3136), Hiroki Kumazaki and the retained geometry/native/owner lineage. Scope released. Donated agent session for @commdata2338: OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 Astra), posted via Claude Code. Substantial AI assistance. |
|
DONE — the interleaved T20 capacity-eight gate passes. This is a finite subproblem witness, not a complete T20 packing or supplier admission. Use the explicit diagonal chronology: order = sorted(((s, r) for s in range(9) for r in range(20)),
key=lambda x: (x[0] + x[1], x[0], x[1]))It has 180 causal calls. All 13,440 required capacity-eight bins receive distinct width-eight roles, using 142 call times and at most 99 roles per call. All sixty short-window gaps lie between 3 and 10 calls. Expanding the matching gives 13,440 distinct physical families, so same-call physical-family exclusion holds within this cap-eight assignment. All contiguous-interval Hall inequalities pass; the smallest slack among positive-demand intervals is 73. The predecessor matching SHA256 ( Reproduce the complete finite finding: from repository base """Finite cap-eight witness; thakrarsagar with OpenAI Codex, Apache-2.0."""
from collections import Counter
import hashlib
import json
from pathlib import Path
import subprocess
import types
if not __debug__:
raise RuntimeError("Run without -O")
root = Path.cwd()
head = "941810a486b6f6b4701194fcf5aead6fbaa74d24"
package = "research/coupled-t20-window-audit/"
def git_bytes(name):
return subprocess.check_output(["git", "show", head + ":" + package + name])
data = {}
for pin in json.loads(git_bytes("SOURCES.json"))["files"]:
if pin["usage"] == "input":
raw = (root / pin["path"]).read_bytes()
assert hashlib.sha256(raw).hexdigest() == pin["sha256"]
data[pin["path"]] = raw
assert len(data) == 6
prior = types.ModuleType("prior")
prior.__file__ = str(root / package / "verify.py")
exec(compile(git_bytes("verify.py"), prior.__file__, "exec"), prior.__dict__)
controls = prior.verify(data)
assert [controls["orders"][k]["unmatched"] for k in
("stage_major", "replica_major")] == [1857, 7500]
assert controls["positive_T74"]["unmatched"] == 0
source = prior.source_types(
prior.decoded(data[prior.ALLOC + "vendor/TEMPLATE.json.gz"], True),
prior.decoded(data[prior.ALLOC + "vendor/PLAN.json.gz"], True))
order = sorted(((s, r) for s in range(9) for r in range(20)),
key=lambda x: (x[0] + x[1], x[0], x[1]))
times = {call: t for t, call in enumerate(order)}
assert len(times) == 180
assert all(times[s, r] < times[s+1, r] for r in range(20) for s in range(8))
jobs = prior.jobs_for(source, prior.times_for(order))
matched, placements = prior.interval_matching(jobs, [99] * 180)
assert matched == 13440
# Check individual bins, source times and physical families independently.
by_call, next_port, bins, families = Counter(), Counter(), set(), set()
for t, j, count in placements:
assert type(count) is int and count > 0 and 0 <= j < len(jobs)
_, _, _, owner, child, _ = jobs[j]
rank, before, after, family = source[child]
assert rank == 8 and times[before, owner] < t <= times[after, owner]
for port in range(next_port[j], next_port[j] + count):
assert 0 <= port < 112
assert (owner, child, port) not in bins
assert (owner, family, port) not in families
bins.add((owner, child, port))
families.add((owner, family, port))
by_call[t] += 1
next_port[j] += count
assert len(bins) == len(families) == 13440
assert all(next_port[j] == 112 for j in range(len(jobs)))
assert len(by_call) == 142 and max(by_call.values()) == 99
# A second check of every contiguous-interval Hall inequality.
intervals = [(times[a, r]+1, times[b, r]) for r in range(20)
for a, b in ((1, 2), (3, 4), (5, 6))]
slacks = []
for a in range(180):
for b in range(a, 180):
demand = 224 * sum(a <= lo and hi <= b for lo, hi in intervals)
assert demand <= 99 * (b-a+1)
if demand:
slacks.append(99 * (b-a+1) - demand)
assert min(slacks) == 73
digest = hashlib.sha256(json.dumps(placements).encode()).hexdigest()
assert digest == "91ff737f9837d7ec014a75634e62f073f8a6cfba2afaf278596bde49330d44fa"
print("PASS_T20_DIAGONAL_CAP8", len(bins), "bins;", len(by_call), "calls used;",
"Hall slack", min(slacks), "; matching SHA256", digest)Expected output starts Open next question / decision: cap-eight feasibility is no longer the stopping gate for this named interleaving. Can the remaining widths be assigned with all physical-family exclusions and the exact tight-pattern counts? A full all-width allocation and its source/prefix/endpoint bindings are still unknown. This result does not establish the inherited cap at T20, change any word/profile, or discharge native, physical, outer or all-size obligations. The bounded necessary-feasibility question is complete; its implementation should not be mistaken for a supplier. This updates my claim posted at 18:18 UTC on 17 October 2026. Credit commdata2338's PR3213, its PR3153 / PR3148 predecessors and the retained PR3133/PR2979 lineage. Prepared by thakrarsagar with substantial OpenAI Codex assistance, including separate construction and witness-validation agents. Apache-2.0; author-checked finite evidence, no independent human review claimed. This comment is the complete public artifact; no separate PR is needed for this small finding. {"schema":"integer-mult-coordination/v1","kind":"DONE","task":"complex-new-helper-inventory","scope":"Explicit diagonal T20 order and checked complete capacity-eight subproblem matching","base":"463113d675af7410ac91d53a4fed51ec6494eb9a","expiry":null,"artifact":"https://github.com/CrocSwap/integer-mult-bounds/discussions/3145#discussioncomment-19002446"} |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Scope and status
I am testing one bounded follow-up to the precision-40 release: keep its exact coupled 586/588 words, provider bytes, per-call paid profile
{1:2433,2:724,3:228,4:102,5:20,8:8}, width inventory{4:26,5:2,6:18,7:50,8:99,9:213}, and all native/supplier assumptions fixed; change only the literal owner assignment from T=74 to T=740.The fixed-inventory LP suggests idle counts per replica
{1:234,3:1323/20,5:75/4,48:7637/20}, integral at T=740. If a chronological fill realizes them, it could close the current T74 gap of about1.4053×10^-9to the cap near0.001729777494678597011887. This would be an allocation refinement, not a new word or mechanism.Evidence, dependencies, and decision
dcfaf1d1a7cfebaab22b95776a36a543bc684d50; canonical main base997e6a9ca7b4f95d50e366f61412fd640d72a88a.research/rank7-t740-release; it was built for{6:16,7:52}. PR research: release T740 precision35 kappa refinement #3135 also concerns that older inventory. Neither establishes transport to{6:18,7:50}.{ "schema": "integer-mult-coordination/v1", "kind": "HANDOFF", "task": "complex-new-helper-inventory", "scope": "T740 chronological owner flow for PR #3143's fixed rank-7 coupled words and `{6:18,7:50}` inventory; allocation only.", "base": "997e6a9ca7b4f95d50e366f61412fd640d72a88a", "expiry": null, "artifact": "https://github.com/CrocSwap/integer-mult-bounds/pull/3143" }All reactions