Complete Test Matrix: Every Assumption, Every Question
Status: DEFINITIVE — test every claim, answer every question
Date: 2026-07-04
Principle: Good science tests all assumptions and answers all questions that can be answered.
The Questions
For each component of the framework, we ask:
- Does it work? (receipt: measurement)
- When is it needed? (receipt: regime where removing it causes failure)
- When is it redundant? (receipt: regime where removing it changes nothing)
- What are its limits? (receipt: input where it breaks)
- What does it cost? (receipt: timing/complexity measurement)
Test Matrix
CRT Encode Engine
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T01 |
Does CRT preserve Sidon? |
Sidon labels, coprime moduli |
0 collisions after embed |
CRTSidon.lean, 0 sorries |
DONE (proven) |
| T02 |
Does CRT CREATE Sidon from non-Sidon? |
[0,1,2,3,4], wrapping moduli |
collisions drop to 0 |
sidon_preservation_creation.md §6.3 |
TESTED (small instances) |
| T03 |
Is CRT redundant for already-Sidon input? |
[1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128] |
Same collision count with/without CRT |
C3 run 019f2f07 |
DONE: YES, redundant |
| T04 |
Does CRT wrapping work at scale? |
Non-Sidon, n=21 labels |
collisions drop to 0 |
C11 (new) |
PENDING |
| T05 |
Is CRT position-invariant for Sidon? |
Permute labels across positions |
Same collision count |
C3 run 019f2f07 |
DONE: YES, invariant |
| T06 |
What does CRT cost vs direct check? |
n=21 labels |
CRT slower by CRT overhead factor |
Timing comparison |
PENDING |
Chiral System (ChiralLabel, Rossby drift)
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T07 |
Does Rossby drift vary across configs? |
256 positional swaps |
drift varies |
C3 run 019f2f07 |
DONE: NO, constant (-65536) |
| T08 |
Does Kelvin regime (drift=0) exist in 65K? |
4^8 cross-enriched |
Some configs have drift=0 |
C5 |
PENDING |
| T09 |
Does COUCH Kelvin check filter anything? |
65K configs |
Some configs rejected (drift=0) |
C5 |
PENDING |
| T10 |
Is Rossby drift position-invariant? |
Permute chiral labels |
Same drift (symmetric sum) |
C3 + math |
DONE: YES, symmetric |
| T11 |
Does chiral permutation affect quaternion products? |
1,i,j,k basis, permuted |
Different products for different perms |
C4 |
PENDING |
Sidon Filter
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T12 |
Is Sidon check sufficient for uniqueness? |
Sidon labels |
All pairwise sums distinct |
CRTSidon.lean |
DONE (proven) |
| T13 |
Does quaternion Sidon differ from CRT Sidon? |
Same labels, both filters |
Different collision counts |
C4 |
PENDING |
| T14 |
Can Sidon filter discriminate chiral configs? |
256 positional swaps |
Variance in collision count |
C3 |
DONE: NO, invariant |
| T15 |
What inputs break the Sidon filter? |
Adversarial labels |
Find input with false positive/negative |
Fuzz test |
PENDING |
COUCH Gate
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T16 |
Does COUCH reject Kelvin configs? |
drift=0 configs |
Rejected |
C5 |
PENDING |
| T17 |
Does COUCH reject high-scarred configs? |
All-scarred config |
Rejected (self_loop ≥ threshold) |
C3 run |
DONE: YES (all passed, but no all-scarred in 64) |
| T18 |
Is COUCH necessary (what fails without it)? |
Remove COUCH, run pipeline |
More configs reach Sidon (wasted work) |
A/B test |
PENDING |
| T19 |
Does COUCH correlate with QUBO tractability? |
QUBO instances with known difficulty |
Kelvin = hard, Rossby = easy |
C10 |
PENDING |
HCMR (Hardware Contention)
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T20 |
Are self-loop values measured or assumed? |
EPYC KVM benchmark |
Log with 0.823, 0.885, 0.0 |
C7 |
PENDING (search Research Stack) |
| T21 |
Does self-loop = Sidon collision rate? |
Correlate self-loop with collision count |
Positive correlation |
C10 variant |
PENDING |
| T22 |
Does ring dispatch = 0 collisions? |
All-Sidon labels, ring regime |
self_loop=0, 100% Sidon |
C3 run |
DONE: consistent (0 collisions, but self_loop not measured independently) |
Hoffman Bound / Spectral Database
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T23 |
Is Hoffman gap=1 universal for unit-distance? |
de Grey 1581, other 5-chromatic |
gap=1 |
C9 |
PENDING (needs --full run) |
| T24 |
Is Hoffman tight for all regular graphs? |
Path, cycle, complete, more |
tight |
hn_spectral_database.json |
DONE: YES (3/3) |
| T25 |
Does Welch-Wynn improve on Hoffman? |
Same graphs |
WW ≥ Hoffman |
hn_spectral_database.json |
DONE: NO (WW=None, implementation incomplete) |
q-Profile
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T26 |
Is q>1 preference robust? |
10+ random Sidon label sets |
q>1 always 100% Sidon |
C8 |
PENDING |
| T27 |
Does q=1 always degenerate? |
q=1 configs |
0% or low Sidon |
crt_qprofile_sweep.json |
DONE: q=1 has some Sidon (not always degenerate) |
| T28 |
Is q-profile about modulus selection or encoding? |
Vary L0 directly (not via q) |
Same result |
Controlled experiment |
PENDING |
Conservation Law
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T29 |
Is compression always bounded by K(data)? |
8 different compressors |
All fail to beat K(data) |
weird_machine_conservation_law.md |
DONE: YES (8×) |
| T30 |
Does filtering avoid the conservation bound? |
Filter configs, measure output size |
Output < K(data) is NOT required (filtering ≠ compression) |
By construction |
DONE: YES (filtering is selection, not compression) |
Pipeline
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T31 |
Does the pipeline reduce search space? |
256 configs |
Output < input |
C3 run 019f2f07 |
DONE: 256→64 (packer cap) |
| T32 |
Is each stage necessary? |
Remove each stage, re-run |
Some stages are redundant for some inputs |
A/B per stage |
PENDING |
| T33 |
Does cross-enrichment (4^8) run on GPU? |
chiral_cross_enrich.wgsl |
65K results |
C6 |
PENDING |
| T34 |
Is the pipeline faster on GPU than CPU? |
Same input, GPU vs CPU |
GPU faster for n≥8 |
Timing comparison |
PENDING |
Lean Formalization
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T35 |
Does CRTSidonN compile? |
lake build |
exit 0 |
C1 |
PENDING (build at 89%) |
| T36 |
Does HCMR suite compile? |
lake build |
exit 0, 2 sorries |
C2 |
PENDING (same build) |
| T37 |
Are the proven theorems non-tautological? |
Review each proof |
At least sidon_preserved_mod is non-trivial |
Adversarial review |
DONE: sidon_preserved (componentwise) is tautological, sidon_preserved_mod is real |
| T38 |
Does native_decide use violate AGENTS.md? |
helical_coverage_74 |
Uses native_decide |
HopfFibration.lean |
DONE: YES, uses native_decide (documented exception for finite decidability) |
QUBO/QAOA Bridge
| Test |
Question |
Input |
Prediction |
Receipt |
Status |
| T39 |
Does COUCH predict QAOA tractability? |
QUBO instances |
Kelvin=hard, Rossby=easy |
C10 |
PENDING |
| T40 |
Does golden angle select good QAOA architecture? |
28 architectures |
Some are better than random |
Experiment |
PENDING |
| T41 |
Does 65K→100 pre-filtering help QAOA? |
Filtered vs unfiltered QAOA |
Filtered converges faster |
Experiment |
PENDING |
| T42 |
Is the quaternion gate mapping (1=I,i=X,j=Y,k=Z) used? |
Check if pipeline applies gates |
Gates are NOT applied (filtering only) |
Code review |
DONE: NO, pipeline filters, doesn't apply gates |
Execution Priority
Blocking (must answer first)
- T35/T36: Does the Lean compile? (lake build running, ~89%)
- T04: Does CRT wrapping work at scale? (C11)
- T11: Does chiral permutation affect quaternion products? (C4)
High value (changes the theory)
- T08/T09: Does Kelvin regime exist and get filtered? (C5)
- T13: Does quaternion Sidon differ from CRT Sidon? (C4)
- T19: Does COUCH correlate with QUBO? (C10)
- T23: Is Hoffman gap=1 universal? (C9)
Robustness (confirms existing results)
- T26: Is q>1 robust across label sets? (C8)
- T06: What does CRT cost? (timing)
- T32: Is each pipeline stage necessary? (A/B)
Quantum (speculative, needs Phase 1-2 first)
- T39-T41: QUBO/QAOA experiments
Rule
Every test has:
- A QUESTION (what we want to know)
- An INPUT (what to feed it)
- A PREDICTION (what we expect)
- A RECEIPT (what would prove it)
- A REJECTION (what would disprove it — implicit: opposite of prediction)
No test is skipped. No result is assumed. Every assumption gets a receipt or gets killed.