RΛIN / ATO · Research in public · 06 November 2026
Context Repair:
when the question
outgrows the summary.
Eight states. One compressed view. Change the question, find an ambiguity, then test how much information repairs it.
A summary can be sufficient for one task and fail on another. This exact finite example lets you inspect every state and every collision. It gives an exact example of task-dependent sufficiency and repair.
Experiment 07 / Exact enumeration
Ask for what was discarded.
Loading the eight-state model. The construction and proof remain readable below.
Each card is a fibre: states with identical retained information. Gold cards contain conflicting answers; green cards contain one answer. Labels show the distinction without relying on color. Every triple has probability 1/8.
A uniform eight-state model with declared deterministic observation rules. The repair budget is a worst-case fixed-length binary bound with Q known to the decoder. A bound need not be achieved by an arbitrary choice of added coordinates.
Inspect every state
| Full state | Summary Q | Answer Y | Repair A |
|---|
What is being measured?
A missing answer has a cost.
Let X be the full state, Q its retained summary and Y the answer to the newly admitted question. Define the context debt as H(Y | Q), using ordinary conditional entropy in bits. Zero means Y is determined by Q on the stated distribution’s support.
Within each Q-fibre, count the distinct possible answers: kq. An exact repair needs at least ceil(log₂ kq) bits in that fibre, because fewer binary codes cannot distinguish all of its answers. The display reports the maximum across fibres. This counts answers, not necessarily full hidden states.
If a repair A makes H(Y | Q, A) = 0, then H(A | Q) ≥ H(Y | Q). To see why, conditional mutual information gives H(Y | Q) = I(Y; A | Q) ≤ H(A | Q). This is a standard information-theoretic bound, not a newly discovered entropy law.
A single pair with the same Q and different Y is an explicit failure certificate. A successful repair here applies only to these eight states and the selected question; it does not establish general reasoning ability or safety in an untested environment.
Mathematical background: Polyanskiy & Wu, MIT 6.441 lecture notes, chapters on entropy, conditional information and sufficient statistics. The finite enumeration and derivation on this page are inspectable in the model source.
Three tests worth recording.
- Keep Q = first bit and Y = last bit. The missing information is one bit. Adding the first bit again cannot help; adding the last bit removes the ambiguity.
- Ask for the full triple while retaining only the first bit. Four answers share each fibre: two repair bits are needed. Add b and c and check every row.
- Retain parity and ask for parity, then change the question to the full triple. A sufficient summary becomes insufficient without any change to the underlying states.
Next research test
Take the witness into real records.
To apply this demonstration to real research, publish a dataset, its compression rule, the questions it must answer, collision witnesses and the cost of each repair. The eight-state model alone does not establish an empirical result.
What a ratio hides
Compare the finite example with magnitude lost under a projective summary.
Open Golden Scale →What pairwise views hide
Inspect different full relations with the same pairwise summaries.
Open the relation lab →