EXP-044NEGATIVE
Advantage Decomposition / SHA-256

R60 nested-reset cost audit

A nested decision tree of exact reset certificates can evaluate the R60 target predicate with less diagnostic work than the exact ripple baseline.

Claim statusNO END-TO-END MINING ADVANTAGE DEMONSTRATED

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

Date2026-08-23
HardwareClassical exact algebraic verifier
Run scopeThree canonical variants
ReproducibilityFreeze the tree, count every evaluated primitive, compare identical cases with ripple and the full suffix, and reproduce both zero-error decisions and the negative saving.
01 / Question & hypothesis

What was tested?

A nested decision tree of exact reset certificates can evaluate the R60 target predicate with less diagnostic work than the exact ripple baseline.

02 / Scientific basis

Why the test is meaningful

Structural reuse only becomes an advantage if certificate discovery, branching and fallback are counted. The fair comparison measures identical exact decisions under one work model and includes every reset certificate evaluated.

saving = 1 − E[W_reset]/E[W_ripple]H₀:E[W_reset]≥E[W_ripple]exactness: decision_reset = decision_ripple = full suffix
Cost gate: reset tree versus rippleThe exact reset tree cost more under the frozen diagnostic-work model.EXP-044 / COST GATE: RESET TREE VERSUS RIPPLERIPPLE41.687RESET TREE43.735SAVING−4.91%
FIGURE / RESULT READINGThe exact reset tree cost more under the frozen diagnostic-work model.
03 / Method

How it was tested

Evaluate registered nested reset trees on 3,000 cases per configuration, count certificate and suffix work, compare with exact ripple evaluation and cross-check every REJECT/CONTINUE decision against the full suffix oracle.

04 / Observed result

What happened

Reset / ripple work1.0491
Observed saving−4.91%
Decision errors0

Every exactness gate passed with zero tree, certificate, engine or suffix errors. The best observed reset tree averaged 43.735 work units versus 41.687 for ripple: ratio 1.0491 and saving −4.91%. It rejected 2,984 of 3,000 cases and continued 16, yet still cost more.

05 / Validation

Exactness and statistical controls

Multiple registered configurations showed the same approximately 4.9–5.0% penalty. Reporting the best observed configuration is conservative for the hypothesis; even that configuration failed the cost gate.

06 / Interpretation

What the result means

The nested certificates are exact but operationally inferior under the frozen work model. V44 is a clear negative result and blocks this reset-tree implementation from being called an advantage.

Limitations

  • Work units are diagnostic, not measured ASIC joules.
  • A different implementation could have different constants.
  • The closure applies to the registered tree and cost model.
07 / Reproduction

Evidence trail

Freeze the tree, count every evaluated primitive, compare identical cases with ripple and the full suffix, and reproduce both zero-error decisions and the negative saving.

Canonical variants

SUBENGINE-V44ASUBENGINE-V44BSUBENGINE-V44C

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