Add chained-seam findings note (medial pigeonhole)
Write up the R_T coupling, the uniform-family result (feasible n=9, infeasible n=12 via empty size-7 universal, 0001112 blocked 210/211), and the open threads. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
+78
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
|
||||
# Chained seams: the medial pigeonhole, located
|
||||
|
||||
Companion to the interface-alphabet results (`kempe_interface_admissibility_probe.py`,
|
||||
`kempe_tile_overlap_probe.py`). This note pursues the paper's §6 *medial pigeonhole
|
||||
programme* — the restriction relation `R_T` between a tire's outer and inner boundary
|
||||
states, and the open *chain-pigeonhole conjecture* — at the data level.
|
||||
|
||||
Scripts: `kempe_transfer_relation_probe.py`, `kempe_uniform_family_probe.py`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Background
|
||||
|
||||
A nested chain `T_0 ⊃ T_1 ⊃ …` glues into a proper 3-colouring of `M(G)` iff
|
||||
consecutive boundary states match: `inner-state(T_i) = outer-state(T_{i+1})`
|
||||
(compatible family, paper Prop "gluing criterion"). Boundary states are necklaces
|
||||
(colours permuted, boundary walk rotated/reflected). The restriction relation
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
R_T ⊆ outer-states × inner-states
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
records which (outer, inner) boundary-state pairs one Kempe-balanced colouring of `T`
|
||||
realises jointly. The chain-pigeonhole conjecture asks whether nested `R_T`'s can ever
|
||||
compose to empty.
|
||||
|
||||
Established earlier: the realised boundary alphabet (each side) is exactly the full
|
||||
parity-admissible set, identical inner vs outer, `n`-independent (n=9, n=12, m=3..8);
|
||||
and every *pair* of tiles overlaps, so single seams never dead-end.
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding 1 — `R_T` is genuinely coupled
|
||||
|
||||
`R_T` is **not** a product of its projections: a tile's inner boundary necklace
|
||||
constrains its outer one. Seen at n=9 in the `(p,q) = (4,5)` and `(5,4)` size classes
|
||||
(`product? = False`), and broadly at n=12. So "every seam individually realisable"
|
||||
does **not** trivially pass through a tile.
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding 2 — the uniform shortcut works at n=9, breaks at n=12
|
||||
|
||||
Question: is there one boundary state `σ_m` per level-cycle *size* that threads every
|
||||
tile simultaneously (outer face and every inner face)? If so, painting every level
|
||||
cycle `σ_m` glues any tree with no pigeonhole.
|
||||
|
||||
- **n=9: FEASIBLE.** Unique universal per size (`|D[m]| = 1`), and notably *not*
|
||||
monochromatic — the balanced-block necklaces
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
σ3 = 012 σ4 = 0011 σ5 = 00012 σ6 = 000011
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
threads all 66 tiles. (Caveat: n=9 has **no** branching tiles.)
|
||||
|
||||
- **n=12: INFEASIBLE.** 1237 tiles (1029 bite, 175 genuinely branching). The CSP fails
|
||||
for one sharp reason: **size-7 seams admit no universal state** (`|D[7]| = 0`). The
|
||||
211 size-7 boundaries realise all 10 admissible necklaces between them, but their
|
||||
intersection is empty — the near-universal `0001112` lands on **210 of 211**,
|
||||
blocked by a single tile.
|
||||
|
||||
Per-size universal domain sizes at n=12: `3:1 4:1 5:1 6:2 7:0 8:4 9:1`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding 3 — interpretation
|
||||
|
||||
Universals vanish as the tile population grows (more boundaries of a given size → more
|
||||
sets to intersect → empty), so the "paint every seam identically" shortcut is doomed
|
||||
at scale; the per-interface pigeonhole choice is genuinely necessary. **But this is
|
||||
not an obstruction to gluing** — pairwise overlap still always holds, so chains still
|
||||
glue by choosing states per interface. We have *located why the conjecture is hard*:
|
||||
the difficulty lives in the non-uniform, branch-coupled selection across the tree,
|
||||
exactly where the paper's pigeonhole sits — not in any single seam or a uniform
|
||||
assignment.
|
||||
|
||||
## Open threads
|
||||
|
||||
- **Odd-size seams are the pressure point.** Uniformity first fails at size 7 (odd);
|
||||
small odd sizes 3, 5 kept unique universals. Does every large odd size lose its
|
||||
universal as `n` grows? (tracked below / in follow-up).
|
||||
- **The 210/211 near-miss.** A single tile blocks the size-7 universal — identifying
|
||||
the "universal-breaker" tiles may expose the combinatorial core.
|
||||
- **Branch-tree composition.** n=12 has 175 true branching tiles; composing `R_T`
|
||||
along actual trees (not just per-size uniformity) is the conjecture proper.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user