Skip to main content

∑ULR

The Observer-Relative Identifiability Boundary Between Learning and Inference

13 equations extracted from this document. Each equation pairs with the prose paragraph that immediately precedes it in the source — clicking the title above opens the full document.

Open source document →

  1. #1

    If a role induces transcript laws , then the optimal equal-prior misclassification probability is

    R∗=1−∥PL−PI∥TV2\boxed{ R^*=\frac{1-\lVert P_L-P_I\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}}}{2} }
  2. #2

    Learning and inference are not primitive symbols of a probability space. A system boundary must first declare which events it calls or . Role typing may include

    (information source, write target, persistence, reset/clone response, future causal role).(\text{information source},\ \text{write target},\ \text{persistence}, \ \text{reset/clone response},\ \text{future causal role}).
  3. #3

    The minimum risk over all classifiers is

    RF∗=E[min⁡{η,1−η}].R^*_{\mathcal F} = \mathbb E[\min\{\eta,1-\eta\}].
  4. #4

    Fix an observer contract and horizon, and let the transcript space be . The optimal binary risk for the two simple hypothesis laws is given exactly by the total-variation identity

    R∗=1−∥PL−PI∥TV2,∥PL−PI∥TV=sup⁡A∈H∣PL(A)−PI(A)∣.R^*=\frac{1-\lVert P_L-P_I\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}}}{2}, \qquad \lVert P_L-P_I\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}} =\sup_{A\in\mathscr H}|P_L(A)-P_I(A)|.
  5. #5

    Consequently,

    R∗=12  ⟺  PL=PI,R∗=0  ⟺  PL⊥PI.R^*=\frac12\iff P_L=P_I, \qquad R^*=0\iff P_L\perp P_I.
  6. #6

    Suppose the observer can use a nonanticipating, role-blind policy that selects actions from the past transcript. Define the separation coefficient at horizon by

    ΔT(O)=sup⁡π∈ΠO∥PL,Tπ−PI,Tπ∥TV\Delta_T(O) = \sup_{\pi\in\Pi_O} \lVert P_{L,T}^{\pi}-P_{I,T}^{\pi}\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}}
  7. #7

    The infimal risk over permitted policies and classifiers is

    RT∗(O)=1−ΔT(O)2R_T^*(O)=\frac{1-\Delta_T(O)}{2}
  8. #8

    Let be a set of hidden events and a role map. Identify events that produce the same response profile under every permitted policy and horizon:

    e∼Oe′  ⟺  Pe,Tπ=Pe′,Tπfor all (π,T)e\sim_O e' \iff P_{e,T}^{\pi}=P_{e',T}^{\pi} \quad\text{for all }(\pi,T)
  9. #9

    A universal observer classifier valid for every event exists if and only if factors through this quotient:

    ρ=ρˉ∘qO.\rho=\bar\rho\circ q_O.
  10. #10

    If an internal transcript is obtained by garbling an external transcript through a Markov kernel , then

    ∥KPL−KPI∥TV≤∥PL−PI∥TV.\lVert KP_L-KP_I\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}} \le \lVert P_L-P_I\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}}.
  11. #11

    For one fixed infinite policy, let be the finite-prefix laws. Prefix TV converges to full path-law TV. The optimal finite-prefix error tends to zero if and only if the full path laws are mutually singular:

    Rt∗→0  ⟺  PL∞⊥PI∞.R_t^*\to0 \iff P_L^{\infty}\perp P_I^{\infty}.
  12. #12

    Let denote the probe law after event , the law after a typed reset , and the baseline law in which the event did not occur. Define

    Dr(e)=sup⁡π∈Πprobe∥Pe,rπ−P0,rπ∥TV.D_r(e) = \sup_{\pi\in\Pi_{\mathrm{probe}}} \lVert P_{e,r}^\pi-P_{0,r}^\pi\rVert_{\mathrm{TV}}.
  13. #13

    In a linear toy model, two systems with the same passive law can separate with TV 1 under a policy. Merely adding an operation named “reset,” however, is not sufficient. If distinct persistence operators satisfy

    HR1B=HR2BHR_1B=HR_2B