Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Simon rank growth probability

Statement

Let d=n−1 and consider a finite history with k<d accepted rows in the Simon rank process. These rows are independent by the acceptance rule, so the current rank is k. The next independent sample increases the rank with probability

pk=1−2k−d≥12.

Writing qk=2k−d, for each fixed rank-k history and every r∈N, let Ak,r be the event, in the finite continuation experiment of the next r fresh samples, that all r fail to raise rank. For M≥1, let Wk,M on the finite M-sample continuation experiment be the number of samples up to the first rank increase, capped at M, with value M if no increase occurs in that prefix. Then

Pr⁡(Ak,r)=qkr,

and the expected truncated waiting count is

E[Wk,M]=∑j=0M−1qkj≤1pk≤2.

All probabilities and expectations here are over finite continuation experiments; no probability measure on infinite sample histories is assumed.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A fixed Simon oracle, d=n−1, and a finite history with k<d accepted rows.

[F1]

Simon independent-sample rank process: the accepted rows span Vk⊆s⊥, and fresh independent Simon samples are taken until rank d.

[F2]

Simon samples uniformly from s-perp: a fresh sample is uniform on s⊥.

[F3]

The Simon annihilator is an (n−1)-dimensional binary subspace: s⊥ has dimension d and 2d elements.

[F4]

The coordinate vector space over F2 and Binary residue carrier and operations: coefficient lists are in F2k, with each coordinate chosen from {0,1}.

[F5]
[F9]

Finite probability spaces, outcome weights, events, and event probabilities: every finite-prefix outcome space has nonnegative weights summing to one.

[F10]

Real random variables on finite probability spaces and their finite distributions: a real random variable on a finite probability space is a function on that finite outcome set.

[F11]

Expectation of a real random variable on a finite probability space: expectation is the finite sum of value times outcome weight.

Proof

1.1givenF1F4F5F6F7F8algebra

By [F1], each accepted row was outside the span of its predecessors. In a zero linear combination, if the last nonzero coefficient were 1, that row would be a combination of its predecessors, contradicting acceptance; since the only nonzero scalar is 1, this proves inductively that the accepted list is independent by [F6]. It spans Vk by [F7], hence is a basis by [F8]. The coefficient map from F2k to Vk is injective by independence and surjective by span; [F4] gives 2k possible coefficient lists, so ∣Vk∣=2k.

2.1givenF1F2F3step 1.1algebra

By [F2]–[F3], samples are uniform on the 2d elements of s⊥, and [F1] gives Vk⊆s⊥. Exactly 2k lie in Vk by step 1.1, so the probability the next sample is accepted is (2d−2k)/2d=1−2k−d=pk, while the failure probability is qk=2k−d≤1/2.

3.1givenF1step 2.1algebra

Condition on any rank-k history and use the finite r-sample continuation experiment. Let Ak,r be the event that every one of those r samples lies in the current span Vk. On this event the span remains Vk throughout; by freshness, each conditional failure probability is qk, so multiplying the finite conditional probabilities gives Pr⁡(Ak,r)=qkr. For r=0, Ak,0 is the whole one-outcome empty continuation and has probability 1=qk0.

4.1givenF9F10F11F12step 3.1algebra∎

For each finite horizon M, the explicitly defined Wk,M is a function on the finite experiment by [F9]–[F10]. For every 0≤j<M, the event {Wk,M>j} is the event Ak,j after projection to its first j samples, so Wk,M=∑j=0M−11Ak,j. The expectation definition [F11] and step 3.1 give E[Wk,M]=∑j=0M−1qkj. Since 0≤qk≤1/2, [F12] bounds these partial sums by 1/(1−qk)=1/pk≤2.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

63 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources