Compact Gray recurrence with constant deltas
A non-unrolled Gray loop with constant nonce and σ₀ deltas preserves reuse without the code expansion observed in EXP-137.
Diagnostic work, exact algebra and local capabilities are not treated as end-to-end mining advantage.
What was tested?
A non-unrolled Gray loop with constant nonce and σ₀ deltas preserves reuse without the code expansion observed in EXP-137.
Why the test is meaningful
A compact recurrence isolates whether bookkeeping cost, rather than unrolling, consumes the exact linear reuse.
nonce_{i+1}=nonce_i⊕Δ_iσ₀_{i+1}=σ₀_i⊕σ₀(Δ_i)SASS_candidate≈SASS_baselineHow it was tested
Use two 32-entry constant delta tables, explicitly prevent loop unrolling and rerun the four-header, 32-process balanced benchmark.
What happened
SASS remained compact at 2,509 versus 2,507 instructions and exactness gates passed. Performance was neutral/slightly negative: kernel ratio 0.999744, 95% interval 0.998857–1.000632, positive on 1/4 headers.
Exactness and statistical controls
Coverage, B32 hit, hashlib comparison, spills and register count all passed before timing was interpreted.
What the result means
Both compact and unrolled Gray σ₀ reuse fail robust performance gates; bookkeeping consumes the theoretical reuse.
Limitations
- Closure applies to the two registered implementations.
- A different architecture may behave differently.
- No probability-per-hash change is implied.
Evidence trail
Build the frozen compact loop, verify the delta recurrence and repeat equal-work balanced timing.
Canonical variants
CANONICAL-EXP-138PREREGISTERED-CAMPAIGNSEALED-AUDITSource: internally audited canonical reports. Local filesystem structure, private headers and operational identifiers are excluded from publication.