EXP-024VALIDATED
Advantage Decomposition / SHA-256

Operand relations behind high-bit hard resets

Hard resets at bits 16–18 arise from compact exact constancy or pair-relation certificates in the T1 and T2 operands, rather than from an irreducible black-box event.

Claim statusNO END-TO-END MINING ADVANTAGE DEMONSTRATED

Diagnostic work, exact algebra and local capabilities are not treated as end-to-end mining advantage.

Date2026-08-14
HardwareClassical exact algebraic verifier
Run scopeEight canonical variants
ReproducibilityRegenerate the relation grammars, evaluate every 16-point source cube, verify reset value and suffix behavior by direct arithmetic, and require zero errors in the fresh replay.
01 / Question & hypothesis

What was tested?

Hard resets at bits 16–18 arise from compact exact constancy or pair-relation certificates in the T1 and T2 operands, rather than from an irreducible black-box event.

02 / Scientific basis

Why the test is meaningful

A carry reset is determined by the two operand bits entering the local addition. Those bits may be constant even when their source expressions are not individually constant, because equalities, complements or paired dependencies cancel over the registered source cube.

hard reset at i ⇔ T1[i]=T2[i] is constant on the source cubeT1[i], T2[i] ∈ {constant, exact pair relation}reset value = T1[i] = T2[i]
Operand relations behind high-bit hard resetsVisual reading of the published metrics and gates for EXP-024; it summarizes the registered result, not a mining advantage.EXP-024 / OPERAND RELATIONS BEHIND HIGH-BIT HARD RESETSCROSS-CHECK ERRORS0 / 4,083BIT-18 RESETS545FRESH EXACT TESTPASS
FIGURE / RESULT READINGVisual reading of the published metrics and gates for EXP-024; it summarizes the registered result, not a mining advantage.
03 / Method

How it was tested

Decompose operands at bits 16, 17 and 18, enumerate exact T1 and T2 relation grammars, compile joint reset pathways and independently replay every pathway. Use bits 5 and 6 only as a control, not as permission to redirect the main line.

04 / Observed result

What happened

Cross-check errors0 / 4,083
Bit-18 resets545
Fresh exact testPASS

All 4,083 V23 cross-checks passed. At bit 18, T1 was constant in 1,319 of 1,361 records and T2 in 1,132; 545 hard resets were fully explained by constant-or-pair pathways. The equivalent hard-reset counts were 442 at bit 17 and 318 at bit 16. Fresh testing remained exact.

05 / Validation

Exactness and statistical controls

The pathway library was exhaustively evaluated over each registered source cube, then checked on fresh records. Every observed hard reset at the three target bits was covered by a compact relation pathway; control-bit results were reported separately to avoid selection bias.

06 / Interpretation

What the result means

V24 turns a useful event label into explicit algebraic prerequisites. This is stronger scientific support for detector construction, but pathway diversity and online evaluation cost remain unresolved.

Limitations

  • Dozens of joint pathways remain, so exactness does not imply a single cheap detector.
  • The control-bit result is not an independent mining signal.
  • Economic and hardware gates were not executed.
07 / Reproduction

Evidence trail

Regenerate the relation grammars, evaluate every 16-point source cube, verify reset value and suffix behavior by direct arithmetic, and require zero errors in the fresh replay.

Canonical variants

SUBENGINE-V24ASUBENGINE-V24BSUBENGINE-V24CSUBENGINE-V24DSUBENGINE-V24ESUBENGINE-V24FSUBENGINE-V24GSUBENGINE-V24H

Source: internally audited canonical reports. Local filesystem structure, private headers and operational identifiers are excluded from publication.