Skip to content

v0.6: The Grammar of Simulation

Choose a tag to compare

View all tags
@yoheinakajima yoheinakajima released this 03 Nov 15:10
v0.6
a9cd801
This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature.
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
Verified
Learn about vigilant mode.

The Grammar of Simulation, version 0.6 (2026-11-03). This version answers Explore Science's review of v0.5.1. That review scored the paper 93 (Platinum) and raised 47 issues, all minor.

  • Dataset: sha256 dc951a62c44ca9786ba5286ba421d7b1ac8447981c43bf3c82b03c381172bb7a. It changed only by two new source records.
  • Read it: at https://simgrammar.com/paper/, or as the attached PDF.
  • Cite it: CITATION.cff, with the dataset hash. The concept DOI 10.5281/zenodo.23846209 resolves to the newest version.

What changed since v0.5.1 (#84, #85):

  • Subtitle: now "…the mathematical, AI, ML, and LLM results that could change them". An affects edge is an asserted potential impact, not a demonstrated change.
  • Opportunity ranking:
    • The ranking table shows ties as places, for example "2 to 5" and "8 to 14", instead of tiers.
    • A new table rebuilds the top 8 under equal weights, a mean of ranks, random weights, two feasibility caps, and a whole-scale rater shift. The why-query stays first under every weighting but falls to second under a cost cap: any opportunity that calls a model during play with no stated budget is capped at feasibility 3.
    • The cross-model table flags the 18 opportunities whose two readings are more than 10 places apart.
    • §9.4 now starts from the five opportunities that both readings put in their top 15.
  • New checks, some of them negative results:
    • The coupling recorded between mechanics does not track legibility (ρ = −0.07).
    • The second model rejected only 2 of 12 proposed negatives at admission.
    • With nothing named in advance, 11 of 19 clusters keep their five most central games together.
    • 38 of 42 predictions would show a feature spreading rather than arriving, including all 9 due in 2027.
  • Predictions (§11): a rule for scoring the whole set, fixed before any prediction resolves. Only technique tests confirmed with the thesis evidence count. The thesis is supported if half or more confirm, and weakened below a quarter.
  • Reporting:
    • Monte Carlo p-values print as "≤" at their floor.
    • The curveball null is cited and defined, and Appendix E defines every null.
    • The determinism classes, the ceiling frames, and the post-2010 count (now a range, 33 to 44) are worded to what the data show.
  • Figures:
    • Figure 10 has a size key.
    • Figure 14 highlights all opportunities tied at the eighth-place priority.
    • Figures 4, 6, and 9 have clearer labels.
    • The PDF bookmarks no longer show layout markup.

No record, score, or stored rank changed. Still open, and now listed in §11.1:

  • agreement with a second person;
  • recoding the determinism classes against written tests;
  • an audience bar for the console clause;
  • error-rate checks of game tags and of the prior-art searches.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Assets 3
Loading