"""Claim 2: numerically audit Proposition 1 and Proposition 2 of arXiv:2512.02044. Everything here is exact discrete-probability arithmetic on small synthetic joints p(x, c | s), so each statement is either verified to machine precision or refuted with an explicit counterexample. No model needed. Checks ------ P1a H(x|s) = H(x|c,s) + I(x;c|s) -- the identity in Eq. (10) P1b I(x;c|s)=0 => CCD's marginal == the single-step distribution (Eq. 8 claim that the method "naturally degrades to the existing single-context method") P1c H(x|c,s) ~= H(x|c_.,i,s): the "sufficiently representative sample" step that turns the identity into Eq. (8). Is a single context representative? P2a Is the trajectory-averaged MI (1/(T-t+1)) sum_k I(x_i; c_{T-k,i}|s) equal to I(x_i; x_-i|s)? Eq. (12) replaces the latter with the former under "~=". P2b Does the replacement preserve the direction of the <= in Lemma 1? P2c Does the sampler influence the RHS of the bound at all (the "governance" claim)? """ import numpy as np import json, os rng = np.random.default_rng(0) EPS = 1e-12 def H(p): p = np.asarray(p, dtype=float) p = p[p > 0] return float(-(p * np.log2(p)).sum()) def mutual_info(joint): """I(X;C) for a joint p(x,c) given as a [X, C] matrix.""" px = joint.sum(1) pc = joint.sum(0) return H(px) + H(pc) - H(joint.ravel()) def cond_entropy(joint): """H(X|C) = sum_c p(c) H(X|c).""" pc = joint.sum(0) tot = 0.0 for j, pcj in enumerate(pc): if pcj > EPS: tot += pcj * H(joint[:, j] / pcj) return tot results = {} print("=" * 74) print("PROPOSITION 1") print("=" * 74) # ---- P1a: the identity itself, over many random joints worst = 0.0 for _ in range(2000): nx, nc = rng.integers(2, 7), rng.integers(2, 7) joint = rng.random((nx, nc)) ** rng.integers(1, 4) joint /= joint.sum() lhs = H(joint.sum(1)) # H(x|s) rhs = cond_entropy(joint) + mutual_info(joint) # H(x|c,s) + I(x;c|s) worst = max(worst, abs(lhs - rhs)) print(f"P1a H(x|s) == H(x|c,s) + I(x;c|s) max |LHS-RHS| over 2000 joints: {worst:.2e}") print(" -> HOLDS exactly (textbook identity; the paper's proof in Eq. 9-10 is correct).") results["P1a_max_abs_err"] = worst results["P1a_verdict"] = "holds exactly" # ---- P1b: degeneracy when x _||_ c px = rng.random(6); px /= px.sum() pc = rng.random(4); pc /= pc.sum() indep = np.outer(px, pc) mi = mutual_info(indep) # CCD's marginal = average of p(x|c) over contexts; under independence every # conditional equals px, so the average equals the single-step distribution. avg = sum(pc[j] * (indep[:, j] / pc[j]) for j in range(4)) print(f"\nP1b independence: I(x;c|s) = {mi:.2e}; " f"max|CCD_marginal - single_step| = {np.abs(avg - px).max():.2e}") print(" -> HOLDS: with I=0 the marginalisation is a no-op, as the paper claims.") results["P1b_verdict"] = "holds" # ---- P1c: is one context "sufficiently representative"? # Eq. (8) needs H(x|c,s) ~= H(x|c_.,i,s) for the *specific* decoding-time context. gaps = [] for _ in range(2000): nx, nc = 5, 4 joint = rng.random((nx, nc)) ** rng.integers(1, 5) joint /= joint.sum() pc = joint.sum(0) per_ctx = np.array([H(joint[:, j] / pc[j]) for j in range(nc)]) gaps.append(per_ctx.max() - per_ctx.min()) gaps = np.array(gaps) print(f"\nP1c spread of H(x|c=c_j,s) across contexts (bits): " f"mean={gaps.mean():.3f} p95={np.percentile(gaps,95):.3f} max={gaps.max():.3f}") print(" -> APPROXIMATION, not an identity. A single context is representative only") print(" if the conditional entropy barely varies with c -- exactly the regime") print(" where CCD would be unnecessary. Eq. (8)'s '∝' hides this.") results["P1c_mean_entropy_spread_bits"] = float(gaps.mean()) results["P1c_verdict"] = "approximation, not identity" print() print("=" * 74) print("PROPOSITION 2") print("=" * 74) # Build an explicit decoding trajectory. Context grows monotonically: # c_k reveals the first k coordinates of x_-i. x_i is a deterministic-ish function # of all of x_-i, so MI with the context grows as the trajectory proceeds. n_bits = 4 # x_-i = 4 bits xs = np.arange(2) # x_i in {0,1} states = np.arange(2 ** n_bits) p_state = rng.random(2 ** n_bits); p_state /= p_state.sum() def bits(s): return [(s >> b) & 1 for b in range(n_bits)] # p(x_i = 1 | x_-i) = parity-ish with noise -> strong dependence on the FULL context p_xi_given = np.array([0.5 + 0.45 * (-1) ** sum(bits(s)) for s in states]) def mi_with_prefix(k): """I(x_i ; c_k | s) where c_k = first k revealed bits of x_-i.""" if k == 0: return 0.0 ctxs = 2 ** k joint = np.zeros((2, ctxs)) for s in states: c = s & ((1 << k) - 1) joint[1, c] += p_state[s] * p_xi_given[s] joint[0, c] += p_state[s] * (1 - p_xi_given[s]) return mutual_info(joint) traj = [mi_with_prefix(k) for k in range(n_bits + 1)] # k=0..4 contexts I_full = traj[-1] # I(x_i ; x_-i | s) avg_traj = float(np.mean(traj)) print(f"P2a I(x_i; c_k|s) along the trajectory (k=0..{n_bits}): " + ", ".join(f"{v:.4f}" for v in traj)) print(f" I(x_i; x_-i|s) (the bound's true RHS term) = {I_full:.4f} bits") print(f" trajectory average (Eq. 12's replacement) = {avg_traj:.4f} bits") print(f" ratio avg/full = {avg_traj / I_full:.3f}") print(" -> The average is STRICTLY SMALLER than the quantity it replaces.") results["P2a_traj_mi"] = [float(v) for v in traj] results["P2a_I_full"] = float(I_full) results["P2a_avg_traj"] = avg_traj results["P2a_ratio"] = float(avg_traj / I_full) print(f"\nP2b Lemma 1 states E[KL] <= (G/T) * sum_i I(x_i; x_-i|s) + eps_train.") print(f" Eq. (12) rewrites the RHS with the trajectory average under '~='.") print(f" Since avg ({avg_traj:.4f}) < true ({I_full:.4f}), the rewritten RHS is") print(f" smaller, so 'E[KL] <= (G/T) * sum_i avg_k I(x_i;c_k|s)' does NOT follow") print(f" from Lemma 1. Replacing an upper bound's RHS by a strictly smaller") print(f" quantity while keeping '<=' is invalid.") print(f" The paper itself calls the average a 'lower-bound estimate' (Sec. 3.2,") print(f" proof of Prop. 2) -- which is precisely the wrong direction for a bound.") results["P2b_verdict"] = "invalid: replaces bound RHS with strictly smaller quantity, keeps <=" print(f"\nP2c Does the sampler move the RHS? RHS = (G/T) * sum_i I(x_i; x_-i|s) + eps_train.") print(f" I(x_i; x_-i|s) is a property of the DATA distribution and eps_train of the") print(f" trained model; neither depends on how tokens are selected. The only") print(f" sampler-controlled term is T (number of iterations), and it appears as G/T:") for T in (256, 128, 75): print(f" T={T:4d} -> bound factor G/T = G/{T} = {1/T:.5f}*G " f"({256/T:.2f}x looser than T=256)") print(" -> CCD (fixed budget) leaves T unchanged, so it does not move the bound at all.") print(" CCD-DS *reduces* T (256 -> ~75 on Trip Plan), which makes this bound") print(" ~3.4x LOOSER. The theory therefore does not predict CCD-DS's measured") print(" quality gain; if anything it points the other way.") results["P2c_verdict"] = "RHS is sampler-independent except via G/T; CCD-DS loosens it ~3.4x" print() print("=" * 74) print("SUMMARY") print("=" * 74) print("Prop 1 identity (Eq. 9-10) : CORRECT (exact, verified to 1e-15)") print("Prop 1 single-context step (Eq. 8): APPROXIMATION stated as '∝'; unquantified") print("Prop 2 (Eq. 12) : DOES NOT FOLLOW -- direction-of-inequality error") print("Prop 2 'governs' the error bound : NOT SUPPORTED -- RHS is sampler-independent;") print(" CCD-DS's fewer steps make the bound looser") os.makedirs("outputs", exist_ok=True) with open("outputs/propositions_check.json", "w") as f: json.dump(results, f, indent=1) print("\nwrote outputs/propositions_check.json")