EXP-031VALIDATED
Advantage Decomposition / SHA-256

ANF cancellation attribution in Σ0 lane 0

The attenuation observed at Σ0(a5) lane 0 can be attributed exactly to cancellation among rotated input monomials rather than described only by an aggregate complexity score.

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 scopeThree canonical variants
ReproducibilityDerive ANFs by exact Möbius transform, tag all nonlinear terms by input lane, reconstruct the output truth table and repeat retention/union summaries on the untouched fresh split.
01 / Question & hypothesis

What was tested?

The attenuation observed at Σ0(a5) lane 0 can be attributed exactly to cancellation among rotated input monomials rather than described only by an aggregate complexity score.

02 / Scientific basis

Why the test is meaningful

Because XOR is addition in GF(2), the same ANF monomial appearing an even number of times across rotated inputs cancels exactly. Attribution tracks provenance of each term, distinguishing retained a5[22] structure from complexity imported by a5[2] and a5[13].

Σ0(a5)[0]=a5[2]⊕a5[13]⊕a5[22]α_S(out)=α_S(2)⊕α_S(13)⊕α_S(22)retention(a5[22]) = |N22 ∩ Nout| / |N22|
ANF cancellation attribution in Σ0 lane 0Visual reading of the published metrics and gates for EXP-031; it summarizes the registered result, not a mining advantage.EXP-031 / ANF CANCELLATION ATTRIBUTION IN Σ0 LANE 0ORIGINAL RECORDS1,361FRESH RECORDS300STABLE RETENTION SIGNNO
FIGURE / RESULT READINGVisual reading of the published metrics and gates for EXP-031; it summarizes the registered result, not a mining advantage.
03 / Method

How it was tested

Build exact ANFs for the three source lanes and their XOR, label each nonlinear monomial by origin, measure union, cancellation and retention, then compare actual survivor and non-survivor groups in original and fresh cohorts.

04 / Observed result

What happened

Original records1,361
Fresh records300
Stable retention signNO

All 1,361 original and 300 fresh records had zero semantic errors. Original retention differed by −0.008 between survivors and non-survivors; fresh retention differed by +0.054, reversing direction. Mean union size was slightly lower for survivors in both cohorts, but by only 0.089 and 0.157 monomials.

05 / Validation

Exactness and statistical controls

Truth-table reconstruction verified every ANF. Original and untouched fresh cohorts were compared using the same fixed measures. Because the retention direction changed, the experiment limits its claim to exact attribution and empirical contrasts.

06 / Interpretation

What the result means

Cancellation can be measured precisely, but it does not yield a stable survivor-specific simplification. The attenuation is distributed among imported and canceled terms rather than explained by a reproducible retention rule.

Limitations

  • Mean monomial differences are descriptive without a preregistered selector.
  • ANF size does not equal circuit latency.
  • Four-variable source cubes capture a local interface only.
07 / Reproduction

Evidence trail

Derive ANFs by exact Möbius transform, tag all nonlinear terms by input lane, reconstruct the output truth table and repeat retention/union summaries on the untouched fresh split.

Canonical variants

SUBENGINE-V31ASUBENGINE-V31BSUBENGINE-V31C

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