Skip to content

Add the #588 projected-memory literature check - #744

Draft
LightChainr wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
retrieval/p592-projected-memory-lit-20260913
Draft

LightChainr wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
retrieval/p592-projected-memory-lit-20260913

Conversation

@LightChainr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

#588 projected-memory literature check (P398 retrieval)

This is a novelty-only retrieval note. It is not evidence about any percolation threshold.
A negative search here is not proof of originality (see the note's §6).

Object (from P398, frozen)

Exact finite CTMC (widths 4–8, 14→1430 states). P = orthogonal projection onto a rank-6
observable-Krylov span, Q=I−P, K(τ)=B exp(τD)C. Four findings judged for prior art:
F1 order saturation 2,3,4,4,4; F2 ~96% seed-readout residual is memory; F3 held-out split
~40% memory / ~43% unrepresented; F4 strong lumping collapses under pencil-outside perturbations
while memory/signed-low-rank stay robust.

Retrieval matrix (Q1–Q4) — cite-or-gap

  • Q1 (highest value): theorem bounding McMillan degree / Hankel rank of a Krylov-seed MZ
    memory kernel independently of env dimensionGAP. Closest: MZ with finite-rank Krylov
    projection (Mori 1965; Gouasmi 2017; Ma–Li–Liu 2018, arXiv:1802.10133); Ho–Kalman McMillan
    degree = rank of infinite Hankel matrix (Hokanson 2018, arXiv:1803.00043). General LTI bound is
    only ≤ dim(D).
  • Q2 (positive realization): no positive/Metzler realization theorem for the projected MZ
    kernel found → GAP.
  • Q3 (highest value, per update): order saturation = theorem or accident? → GAP on theorem;
    the flat low order is explained structurally by rank K(τ) ≤ rank C = 3 (a span identity), not a
    general bound. Numerical order actually grows 12,13,14 (accuracy-target-dependent).
  • Q4 (finite-horizon balancing of Markov chains): finite/time-limited balanced truncation is
    known for LTI; no MZ-CTMC finite-horizon balancing theorem found → GAP (relevant: Agarwal et
    al. 2023, arXiv:2305.20083).
  • F2/F3/F4: the exact 4-way attribution, the 96% and 40/43% figures, and the
    lumping-collapse-vs-memory-robustness comparison are not found in the searched literature →
    GAP (the qualitative "error is mostly memory" claim is classical = [LIT]).

Searched

Google Scholar, arXiv, Royal Society A, AIP PoF, ScienceDirect, handwiki, ResearchGate. No proxy
block encountered.

Negative results (explicit)

No theorem bounds McMillan degree/Hankel rank of the Krylov-seed MZ kernel independent of env
dimension; no positive-realization theorem; no MZ-CTMC finite-horizon balancing theorem; no
published exact 4-way closure attribution nor the 96% / 40%–43% split; no published
lumping-collapse-vs-memory-robustness comparison.

Full Matching-One repository CI has not been run for this commit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant