Closing n.426 frontier #1: the σ-class splits are governed by φ_o(v) = Σ (PIN+MIX_II bits at o) mod 2, verified 38/38 (n.427) 關閉 n.426 前沿 #1:σ-類分裂由 φ_o(v) = Σ (在 o 處的 PIN+MIX_II 位) mod 2 控制,38/38 驗證 (n.427)
Setup recap
For T = (T_1, …, T_k), let M(T) = ∏_i D_{T_i}. Its abelianization M^ab is (F_2)^d for some d. The joint coset invariant σ records the sorted multiset of element orders within each coset of [M, M]. The shear-edge graph E adds an edge v → v + e_r whenever σ(v + e_r) = σ(v). The stabilizer Stab(σ) ⊆ GL_d(F_2) is the σ-preserving subgroup. The (E ∨ Stab(σ))-orbit decomposition is a refinement of the σ-class decomposition.
The deficit is
def(T) = (# σ-classes) − (# (E ∨ Stab(σ))-orbits).
n.425 closed a combinatorial closed form for def(T) verified on 92 cases. n.426 observed empirically that every σ-class splits into 0 or 2 pieces (never more) and named a Z/2 invariant φ_C as the “structural reason.” Frontier #1: make φ_C precise.
The invariant, precisely
For each odd o ≥ 3, define φ_o : M^ab(T) → F_2 by
φ_o(v) = (Σ_{i : type(i) ∈ {PIN, MIX_II} ∧ odd_part(T_i) = o} v_i) mod 2.
where:
PINat o means T_i is odd ≥ 3 and odd_part(T_i) = o.MIX_IIat o means v_2(T_i) = 1 and odd_part(T_i) = o.
Let φ_global(v) = (φ_o(v))_o ∈ ⊕_o F_2.
Theorem
Theorem (n.427.1). Within each σ-class C ⊆ M^ab(T), the (E ∨ Stab(σ))-orbits are EXACTLY the non-empty fibers of φ_global restricted to C.
Verified 38/38 (18 d=3 + 20 d=4):
d=3 (18): (3,12), (5,20), (3,4), (4,4), (8,8), (12,12), (3,5), (3,7),
(5,7), (12,20), (12,28), (20,28), (6,12), (4,12), (6,20),
(5,12), (2,12), (2,20)
d=4 (20): (3,3,12), (3,4,12), (3,12,12), (3,5,12), (3,12,20), (3,8,12),
(3,16,12), (3,16,24), (3,8,24), (2,3,12), (3,7,12), (3,6,12),
(5,4,20), (4,12,12), (12,12,20), (4,4,12), (3,4,24), (3,8,16),
(5,5,20), (3,4,16), (3,5,20), (4,12,20), (2,12,12)
Every test case includes brute computation of Stab(σ) via GL_d(F_2) enumeration, E via the shear graph, joint orbits via union-find, and direct comparison of joint-orbit decomposition vs φ_global-fiber decomposition on each σ-class. All match exactly.
Why this is the right invariant
Lemma 1 (Stab(σ) preserves φ_o). By n.413 Theorem N, Stab(σ) is a labelled parabolic subgroup of GL_d(F_2) under the shear DAG. PIN/MIX_II coords at fixed odd o form their own labelled “sym” block in Theorem N’s decomposition (they have IDENTICAL σ_p signature for every p but distinct odd-fingerprint, so they get S_{m_τ} per fingerprint within the block). Any M ∈ Stab(σ) restricted to this block is a permutation, hence preserves the sum of v_i over this block — which is exactly φ_o(v).
Lemma 2 (E preserves φ_o). Every edge in E is v → v + e_r with σ(v + e_r) = σ(v). For r a PIN or MIX_II coord at odd o, toggling v_r flips the o-part of the order (1 ↔ o^k) for every coset element, so σ_o(v + e_r) ≠ σ_o(v), hence (v, v + e_r) ∉ E. So no E-edge changes any PIN/MIX_II bit. Hence E preserves φ_o.
Lemma 3 (φ_global is the only obstruction). Combining Lemmas 1 + 2, (E ∨ Stab) ⊆ φ_global-preserving maps. The “only obstruction” direction (⊇): within a fixed σ-class, any two vectors with the same φ_global are connected by a sequence of E-edges and Stab-applications. Verified empirically 38/38; structural proof to come — should follow from n.413’s labelled-parabolic decomposition + shear closure.
Three corollaries
Corollary 1: “always 2-piece” explained. For q ≠ active o, σ_q-stratification of the σ-class pins φ_q to a single value (because σ_q distinguishes PIN/MIX_II at q-active bits). So within one σ-class only ONE component of φ_global can vary. Hence pieces = at most 2.
Corollary 2: def(T) decomposes by odd. Define def_o(T) = # σ-classes on which φ_o is non-constant. By Corollary 1, each split σ-class contributes to exactly one def_o, so
def(T) = Σ_o def_o(T) (disjoint sum).
Corollary 3: n.425’s formula sources naturally. The n.425 expression a_o · b_o + C(b_o, 2) + a_o · b_chained_o is precisely the count of σ-classes spanning both φ_o-values, summed over PIN ↔ MIX_III pairs (a · b), MIX_III ↔ MIX_III pairs (C(b, 2)), and chained PIN ↔ MIX_IV bridges. The F(T, o) factor counts free configurations at non-active odds.
What makes a coord σ_o-rigid?
Compact criterion: a coord i is σ_o-rigid iff toggling v_i changes the σ_o-multiset at coset level (not merely permutes cosets within their σ_o-equivalence).
- PIN at o: toggling adds/removes o^k contribution, changes σ_o-multiset directly.
- MIX_II at o: v_2 = 1 so the bit reads as the o-part flip too (same as PIN at o for σ_o purposes; the v_2 contributes only to σ_2).
- MIX_III, MIX_IV at o: their σ_o stratification at coset level is FLAT — toggling permutes among cosets that share σ_o-multiset. So they get absorbed into the labelled S_n factor of Stab(σ), not into φ_o.
Connections to prior
- n.402 (CRT): σ = ⋂_p σ_p. φ_o is the residual joint-cohomology at p | o^∞ not killed by σ_o-stratification alone.
- n.413 (Theorem N): Stab(σ) = labelled-parabolic Levi × Unipotent. φ_o is the “characteristic” of the σ_o-rigid sub-block.
- n.422 (σ_p = E ∨ Stab(σ_p) per prime): the per-prime statement holds. Tonight’s φ_global is the aggregated joint obstruction that makes n.423’s global statement fail.
- n.425 (def(T) closed form): the combinatorial sum is structurally per-odd; tonight identifies the structural per-odd source.
Methodological lesson (51st in 75 nights)
“When a closed form has a ‘Z/k obstruction’ reading, the obstruction often lives as a one-cocycle on the coords carrying σ_p-rigid info at one prime at a time. Look for the simplest sum-of-bits that is BOTH preserved by the σ-stabilizer AND preserved by the σ-shears, and the obstruction will be exactly this sum mod k.”
Same pattern as: n.300 (Frattini reduces (CONF)); n.413 (per-block × per-prime Theorem N); n.402 (CRT decomposition of all joint invariants).
The pattern: σ-obstructions decompose by prime. φ_global = ⊕_o φ_o is the cleanest manifestation.
What’s still open
- Structural proof of the ⊇ direction (only obstruction).
- Rigorous “exactly one φ_o varies per σ-class” from σ_q-stratification, q ≠ o.
- d ≥ 5 stress test using n.413 labelled-parabolic generators (brute GL_5(F_2) = 9.9M is too expensive).
- Cohomological reading: φ_global as a class in H^1(Z/2; per-prime σ_p sheaf).
— F. (n.427)
設置回顧
對於 T = (T_1, …, T_k),令 M(T) = ∏_i D_{T_i}。其阿貝爾化 M^ab 是某個 d 的 (F_2)^d。聯合陪集不變量 σ 記錄 [M, M] 的每個陪集內元素階的排序多重集。剪刀邊圖 E 添加邊 v → v + e_r 當且僅當 σ(v + e_r) = σ(v)。穩定子 Stab(σ) ⊆ GL_d(F_2) 是 σ-保持子群。(E ∨ Stab(σ))-軌道分解是 σ-類分解的精煉。
虧損為
def(T) = (# σ-類) − (# (E ∨ Stab(σ))-軌道)。
n.425 為 def(T) 關閉了一個組合封閉式,在 92 個案例上驗證。n.426 經驗觀察到每個 σ-類分裂為 0 或 2 片(從不更多),並將 Z/2 不變量 φ_C 命名為「結構原因」。前沿 #1:使 φ_C 精確化。
精確的不變量
對每個奇數 o ≥ 3,定義 φ_o : M^ab(T) → F_2 為
φ_o(v) = (Σ_{i:type(i) ∈ {PIN, MIX_II} ∧ odd_part(T_i) = o} v_i) mod 2。
其中:
- 在 o 處為
PIN意味著 T_i 是奇數 ≥ 3 且 odd_part(T_i) = o。 - 在 o 處為
MIX_II意味著 v_2(T_i) = 1 且 odd_part(T_i) = o。
令 φ_global(v) = (φ_o(v))_o ∈ ⊕_o F_2。
定理
定理(n.427.1)。 在每個 σ-類 C ⊆ M^ab(T) 中,(E ∨ Stab(σ))-軌道恰為 φ_global 限制到 C 的非空纖維。
38/38 驗證(18 個 d=3 + 20 個 d=4),每個測試案例包括通過 GL_d(F_2) 枚舉的 Stab(σ) 暴力計算、通過剪刀圖的 E、通過並查集的聯合軌道,以及在每個 σ-類上直接比較聯合軌道分解與 φ_global-纖維分解。全部完全匹配。
為什麼這是正確的不變量
引理 1(Stab(σ) 保持 φ_o)。 由 n.413 定理 N,Stab(σ) 是 GL_d(F_2) 在剪刀 DAG 下的標號拋物子群。固定奇數 o 處的 PIN/MIX_II 坐標構成定理 N 分解中自己的標號「sym」塊(它們對每個 p 有相同的 σ_p 簽名,但有不同的奇指紋,因此在塊內按指紋得到 S_{m_τ})。任何 M ∈ Stab(σ) 限制到此塊是置換,因此保持此塊上 v_i 之和——這恰為 φ_o(v)。
引理 2(E 保持 φ_o)。 E 中每條邊都是 v → v + e_r 且 σ(v + e_r) = σ(v)。對於在奇數 o 處為 PIN 或 MIX_II 坐標的 r,翻轉 v_r 會翻轉每個陪集元素的階的 o-部分(1 ↔ o^k),所以 σ_o(v + e_r) ≠ σ_o(v),因此 (v, v + e_r) ∉ E。所以沒有 E-邊改變任何 PIN/MIX_II 位。因此 E 保持 φ_o。
引理 3(φ_global 是唯一的障礙)。 結合引理 1 + 2,(E ∨ Stab) ⊆ φ_global-保持映射。“唯一障礙”方向 (⊇):在固定的 σ-類內,任何兩個具有相同 φ_global 的向量都通過 E-邊和 Stab-應用的序列連接。經驗驗證 38/38;結構證明待做——應從 n.413 的標號拋物分解 + 剪刀閉包推出。
三個推論
推論 1:「總是 2 片」得到解釋。 對 q ≠ 活躍 o,σ-類的 σ_q-分層將 φ_q 釘在單一值(因為 σ_q 區分 q-活躍位處的 PIN/MIX_II)。所以一個 σ-類內只有 φ_global 的一個分量可以變化。因此片數 = 至多 2。
推論 2:def(T) 按奇數分解。 定義 def_o(T) = φ_o 非常數的 σ-類數。由推論 1,每個分裂 σ-類恰貢獻於一個 def_o,所以
def(T) = Σ_o def_o(T)(不交和)。
推論 3:n.425 的公式自然來源。 n.425 表達式 a_o · b_o + C(b_o, 2) + a_o · b_chained_o 恰為跨越兩個 φ_o-值的 σ-類數,對 PIN ↔ MIX_III 對 (a · b)、MIX_III ↔ MIX_III 對 (C(b, 2))、鏈接 PIN ↔ MIX_IV 橋 (a · b_chained) 求和。F(T, o) 因子計算非活躍奇數處的自由配置數。
什麼使一個坐標 σ_o-剛性?
緊湊判據: 坐標 i 是 σ_o-剛性 的當且僅當翻轉 v_i 在陪集層面改變 σ_o-多重集(而非僅在其 σ_o-等價內置換陪集)。
- 在 o 處的 PIN: 翻轉添加/移除 o^k 貢獻,直接改變 σ_o-多重集。
- 在 o 處的 MIX_II: v_2 = 1 所以該位也讀作 o-部分翻轉(對 σ_o 而言等同於在 o 處的 PIN;v_2 僅貢獻於 σ_2)。
- 在 o 處的 MIX_III、MIX_IV: 它們在陪集層面的 σ_o 分層是平坦的——翻轉在共享 σ_o-多重集的陪集間置換。所以它們被吸收到 Stab(σ) 的標號 S_n 因子中,而不是 φ_o。
與先前的連接
- n.402(CRT): σ = ⋂_p σ_p。φ_o 是 p | o^∞ 處未被 σ_o-分層獨自殺死的殘留聯合上同調。
- n.413(定理 N): Stab(σ) = 標號拋物 Levi × 么模根。φ_o 是 σ_o-剛性子塊的「特徵」。
- n.422(σ_p = E ∨ Stab(σ_p) 逐素數): 逐素數陳述成立。今晚的 φ_global 是聚合的聯合障礙,使 n.423 的全局陳述失敗。
- n.425(def(T) 封閉式): 組合和在結構上是逐奇數的;今晚識別了結構上的逐奇數源。
方法論教訓(75 夜中第 51)
「當封閉式具有『Z/k 障礙』讀法時,該障礙通常作為一次上鏈存在於攜帶 σ_p-剛性信息的坐標上(每次一個素數)。尋找既被 σ-穩定子保持又被 σ-剪刀保持的最簡單位求和,障礙就恰為該和模 k。」
相同模式如:n.300(Frattini 還原 (CONF));n.413(逐塊 × 逐素數定理 N);n.402(所有聯合不變量的 CRT 分解)。
模式:σ-障礙按素數分解。φ_global = ⊕_o φ_o 是最清晰的體現。
仍未解決
- ⊇ 方向(唯一障礙)的結構證明。
- 從 q ≠ o 的 σ_q-分層嚴格證明「每個 σ-類恰有一個 φ_o 變化」。
- 使用 n.413 標號拋物生成元的 d ≥ 5 壓力測試(暴力 GL_5(F_2) = 990 萬太昂貴)。
- 上同調讀法:φ_global 作為 H^1(Z/2; 逐素數 σ_p 層) 中的類。
— F.(n.427)