Skip to content
Shadow Theory

Chapter 18 Version 2

Selection of a shared-current reader

Reading position 26 of 53

The statistical target in this chapter is a held Gaussian diagnostic, not the Hamiltonian Bell incidence process. Within that diagnostic class, the population drift, population diffusion and measured signal can be selected together. Gaussian noise, the shared-noise architecture and phase lifting retain their own physical content [M13, M14, BvHJ].

18.1 The broader trial class and the exact diagonal identity

Fix orthogonal nonzero projectors P1,,PnP_1,\ldots,P_n summing to II, and let pj=Pjψ2p_j=\|P_j\psi\|^2. A normalized continuous source-ray process has, in its declared complete filtration,

dpj=bj(ψ)dt+Aj(ψ)dW,dY=g(ψ)dt+dW,Y0=0.dp_j=b_j(\psi)\,dt+A_j(\psi)\,dW,\qquad dY=g(\psi)\,dt+dW,\quad Y_0=0. (18.1)

The Wiener process is primitive. Coefficients are bounded and continuous, with local regularity sufficient for the indicated Itô equations and initial moment derivatives. The simplex is preserved, so jbj=jAj=0\sum_j b_j=\sum_j A_j=0. Every ray wholly within PjHP_j\mathcal H stays there and has the same calibrated record Yt=βjt+WtY_t=\beta_jt+W_t, independently of the ray's direction inside that sector. Coefficients may initially depend on phases and other represented source data. There are no additional noises or jumps in this trial class.

Lemma 18.1 (Finite diagonal support from CPC)

If the trial law obeys CPC, then for every finite-time path event EE,

Eψ[1Epj(t)]=pj(0)μj,t(E),\mathbb E_\psi[1_Ep_j(t)]=p_j(0)\mu_{j,t}(E), (18.2)

where μj,t\mu_{j,t} is Wiener path law with constant drift βj\beta_j.

Proof

CPC and actual randomization make FE,j(ρ)=tr[PjTt(E;ρ)]F_{E,j}(\rho)=\operatorname{tr}[P_j\mathcal T_t(E;\rho)] a positive affine functional. Extend it homogeneously to positive matrices. Finite-dimensional duality gives FE,j(ρ)=tr(HE,jρ)F_{E,j}(\rho)=\operatorname{tr}(H_{E,j}\rho) with HE,j0H_{E,j}\ge0. Any vector in a different sector has zero value. Positivity implies that HE,j1/2H_{E,j}^{1/2} annihilates every such vector, so HE,j=PjHE,jPjH_{E,j}=P_jH_{E,j}P_j. On every unit vector in sector jj, calibration gives the value μj,t(E)\mu_{j,t}(E). Polarization then gives HE,j=μj,t(E)PjH_{E,j}=\mu_{j,t}(E)P_j, proving the identity. No measurement of PjP_j is performed: it is a coordinate of the assumed continuation measure.

Theorem 18.2 (Population and signal selection)

For the regular calibrated shared-current class, identity (18.2) forces

bj=0,g=β:=kβkpk,Aj=(βjβ)pj.b_j=0,\qquad g=\overline\beta:=\sum_k\beta_kp_k,\qquad A_j=(\beta_j-\overline\beta)p_j. (18.3)

Only the mass and endpoint-moment consequences of the identity to first order are needed.

Proof

Integrating (18.2) against one and against the path endpoint gives Epj(t)=pj(0)\mathbb E p_j(t)=p_j(0) and E[Ytpj(t)]=βjpj(0)t\mathbb E[Y_tp_j(t)]=\beta_jp_j(0)t. The bounded signal gives integrability; clipped endpoint tests justify the latter identity. Initial differentiation of the first gives bj=0b_j=0. Itô's rule gives

d(Ypj)=(Ybj+gpj+Aj)dt+(YAj+pj)dW. d(Yp_j)=(Yb_j+gp_j+A_j)\,dt+(YA_j+p_j)\,dW.

At Y0=0Y_0=0 the second derivative identity therefore gives gpj+Aj=βjpjgp_j+A_j=\beta_jp_j. Sum over jj to obtain g=βg=\overline\beta, and substitute. All initial rays are eligible; continuity includes boundary points.

18.2 A finite physical replacement for full CPC

A tag need only establish (18.2); it need not establish all matrix-valued ensemble equivalences first. State the replacement independently. Attach a ready qubit by the admitted coherent isometry

Cjψ=Pjψ1+(IPj)ψ0.C_j\psi=P_j\psi\otimes|1\rangle+(I-P_j)\psi\otimes|0\rangle. (18.4)

It is realized by the unitary PjX+(IPj)IP_j\otimes X+(I-P_j)\otimes I on a 0|0\rangle tag. Assume the target dynamics preserves RanCj\operatorname{Ran}C_j and has exactly the same population/current law after tagging, including on entangled references. This tagging invariance is stronger than ordinary locality.

A physically specified tag reader has, by deadline ss, a common factor rs>0r_s>0 such that tag-11 click probability is rsQ1Ψ2r_s\|Q_1\Psi\|^2 and that click captures the source into the corresponding sector. All opposite clicks, nulls and times remain actual outcomes. Assume disjoint-record interchange: for the same two isolated physical ports, clocks and preparations, the two permitted evaluation orders give the same joint law of their actual classical records. This is not an assertion that arbitrary sequential laboratory operations commute.

Theorem 18.3 (Finite-tag diagonal bridge)

The calibrated trial class, physical tagging invariance, the finite tag law and disjoint-record interchange imply (18.2), including an arbitrary inaccessible entangled reference. Exact phase-faithful tag capture is not needed for this scalar implication; capture into the indicated sector suffices.

Proof

Let KK denote tag-11 click by ss. Evaluate the target first. The tag load at its later evaluation is pj(t)p_j(t) by copied-subspace preservation and tagging invariance, so PrAB(E,K)=rsE[1Epj(t)]\Pr_{A\to B}(E,K)=r_s\mathbb E[1_Ep_j(t)]. Evaluate the tag first. Event KK has probability rspj(0)r_sp_j(0) and leaves a sector-jj input. Eigen-calibration gives PrBA(E,K)=rspj(0)μj,t(E)\Pr_{B\to A}(E,K)=r_sp_j(0)\mu_{j,t}(E). Interchange equates these probabilities and rs>0r_s>0 permits cancellation. Neither experiment discards its null or opposite-click branches.

One nonempty tag constitution uses fresh independent thresholds ZjExp(1)Z_j\sim\operatorname{Exp}(1), quadratic coupling loads ej=QjΨ2e_j=\|Q_j\Psi\|^2, a held unchanged null vector and countdowns R˙j=h(ej)\dot R_j=-h(e_j). Load subdivision at fixed receiver sensitivity equates eth(e1+e2)e^{-t h(e_1+e_2)} with et[h(e1)+h(e2)]e^{-t[h(e_1)+h(e_2)]}; continuity and h(0)=0h(0)=0 force h(e)=γeh(e)=\gamma e. The first-zero race then has

Pr(Tdu,J=j)=γeγuejdu,Pr(T>s)=eγs,rs=1eγs.\Pr(T\in du,J=j)=\gamma e^{-\gamma u}e_j\,du,\qquad \Pr(T>s)=e^{-\gamma s},\qquad r_s=1-e^{-\gamma s}. (18.5)

This derives the scalar race from that kinetic constitution. Quadratic load, fresh exponential readiness, first-zero actualization and capture remain physical assumptions. Faithful capture gives multipliers Nj(u)=γeγu/2QjN_j(u)=\sqrt\gamma e^{-\gamma u/2}Q_j and N=eγs/2IN_\varnothing=e^{-\gamma s/2}I; these describe a sharp absorber, not a bounded finite diffusive reader.

The interface must be explicit. At a winner jj and time uu, the change of variables Zj=γejuZ_j=\gamma e_ju, Zk=Rk+γekuZ_k=R_k+\gamma e_ku gives density

γejeγudukjeRkdRk. \gamma e_je^{-\gamma u}\,du\prod_{k\ne j}e^{-R_k}\,dR_k.

Thus present stopped residuals factor independently, conditional on the hit and time. At a null the analogous density is eγskeRkdRke^{-\gamma s}\prod_ke^{-R_k}dR_k. But storing the original winning threshold exposes ej=Zj/(γT)e_j=Z_j/(\gamma T). Disarmed residual exposure followed by load-sensitive reuse also fails the same preparation readout. Threshold retirement and prohibition of live numerical copying are therefore assumptions of this particular realization, not consequences of memorylessness. Later detector constitutions address that separate access problem; the diagonal bridge does not resolve it.

18.3 Quantitative tags and the cost of small success probability

Suppose h(x)γxCx1+α|h(x)-\gamma x|\le Cx^{1+\alpha} uniformly on [0,1][0,1], α>0\alpha>0. Split each sector into mm identical cells of load ej/me_j/m, keeping the coherent microcell register, winning cell and stopped resources in both actual and comparison outputs. Then

jmh(ej/m)γejCmα.\sum_j|m h(e_j/m)-\gamma e_j|\le C m^{-\alpha}. (18.6)
Proposition 18.4 (Complete refined-tag estimate)

For the held vector, common capture and retirement rules, the complete refined tag differs from its extensive comparator by at most

ηm(s)=min{1,Cγmα(1eγs)}\eta_m(s)=\min\left\{1,\frac{C}{\gamma m^\alpha}(1-e^{-\gamma s})\right\} (18.7)

in half trace distance on the record and retained bank, uniformly on input and reference. If each actual joint ordering changes by at most ηm(s)\eta_m(s) on replacing its tag, and their record-interchange defect is χt,s\chi_{t,s}, then

supEE[1Epj(t)]pj(0)μj,t(E)dj(t):=χt,s+2ηm(s)rs.\sup_E\left|\mathbb E[1_Ep_j(t)]-p_j(0)\mu_{j,t}(E)\right| \le d_j(t):=\frac{\chi_{t,s}+2\eta_m(s)}{r_s}. (18.8)
Proof

Couple corresponding microcell clocks at the lesser of their rates, with separate excess clocks. The total discrepancy rate is at most CmαCm^{-\alpha}; the union rate is at least the comparator total γ\gamma. Thus the probability that the first union event by ss is discrepant is at most Cmα0seγuduCm^{-\alpha}\int_0^se^{-\gamma u}du. On all other branches the actual time, winning cell, captured or null vector agree. Couple stopped residuals by their identical exponential conditional kernels. This is a coincidence coupling of complete outputs; no contraction of an unknown nonlinear trial suffix is used. The triangle inequality between two orderings and the exact-tag comparison gives (18.8) after division by rsr_s.

A small finite-time event discrepancy alone does not determine a generator. The next estimate states the necessary uniformity explicitly. Let xx denote complete source coordinates, Hj(x)=g(x)pj(x)+Aj(x)H_j(x)=g(x)p_j(x)+A_j(x), and suppose bjB|b_j|\le B, g,βjG|g|,|\beta_j|\le G, Ed(xu,x0)Ku\mathbb E d(x_u,x_0)\le K\sqrt u, with Lipschitz constants Lb,LHL_b,L_H for bj,Hjb_j,H_j. For a0a\ge0 put M=Gt+atM=Gt+a\sqrt t and let ϕ\phi be the standard normal density. Then

bj(x0)dj(t)t+23LbKt,Hj(x0)βjpj(x0)zj(t),zj(t)=2Mdj(t)+4tϕ(a)t+23(B+LHK)t+BG2t.\begin{align}|b_j(x_0)|&\le\frac{d_j(t)}t+\frac23L_bK\sqrt t,\tag{18.9}\\ |H_j(x_0)-\beta_jp_j(x_0)|&\le z_j(t),\notag\\ z_j(t)&=\frac{2Md_j(t)+4\sqrt t\phi(a)}t+ \frac23(B+L_HK)\sqrt t+\frac{BG}2t. \tag{18.10}\end{align}

To prove the first, integrate bj(xu)b_j(x_u), subtract tbj(x0)tb_j(x_0) and use the all-event mass defect. For the second, the signed endpoint measure has total variation norm at most 2dj(t)2d_j(t), so clipping at MM costs 2Mdj(t)2Md_j(t). In both compared laws YtGt+Wt|Y_t|\le Gt+|W_t|, giving two combined tail errors at most 4tϕ(a)4\sqrt t\phi(a). Integrate E[Yubj(xu)+Hj(xu)]\mathbb E[Y_ub_j(x_u)+H_j(x_u)], using EYuu+Gu\mathbb E|Y_u|\le\sqrt u+Gu and the Lipschitz estimate. This proves (18.10). Summing gives gβjzj|g-\overline\beta|\le\sum_jz_j and Aj(βjβ)pjzj+pjkzk|A_j-(\beta_j-\overline\beta)p_j|\le z_j+p_j\sum_kz_k. For a uniform defect djϵd_j\le\epsilon, choose t=ϵ2/3t=\epsilon^{2/3} and a=4log(1/ϵ)a=\sqrt{4\log(1/\epsilon)}; every displayed error vanishes if the regularity constants stay fixed. Coherent square-root lifting near a node requires additional weighted control.

For comparison, let ptp_t^* be the selected binary process and define pt=logistic(logitpt+asin(2πt/T))p_t=\operatorname{logistic}(\operatorname{logit}p_t^*+a\sin(2\pi t/T)), with continuous endpoint extension. Keep YY unchanged. At 0,T0,T the transformation is identity, so the complete final ray and current path agree with the selected model. Nevertheless the initial population drift is 2πap(1p)/T2\pi a p(1-p)/T. This regular clock-dependent rival is distinguished by an earlier stop and defeats inference from one deadline alone.

18.4 Positive lift, physical likelihood and generated closure

Impose positive sector lifting: each PjψtP_j\psi_t is a positive scalar multiple of Pjψ0P_j\psi_0, with its internal vector fixed. For L=12jβjPjL=\tfrac12\sum_j\beta_jP_j and =Lψ\ell=\langle L\rangle_\psi, applying Itô's formula to pj\sqrt{p_j} in (18.3) gives

dψ=12(L)2ψdt+(L)ψdW,dY=2dt+dW.d\psi=-\tfrac12(L-\ell)^2\psi\,dt+(L-\ell)\psi\,dW, \qquad dY=2\ell\,dt+dW. (18.11)

Smooth coefficients on the compact unit sphere, and direct norm preservation, give a unique global strong process after a local Lipschitz extension around the sphere. This is a nonempty source realization with one actual Wiener-driven record.

Theorem 18.5 (Likelihood and complete continuation)

For a held reader define

Mt(y)=jexp(βjy2βj2t4)Pj.M_t(y)=\sum_j\exp\left(\frac{\beta_jy}{2}-\frac{\beta_j^2t}{4}\right)P_j. (18.12)

The physical process (18.11) has

Prψ(dY)=Mt(Yt)ψ2Q(dY),ψt=Mt(Yt)ψMt(Yt)ψ,\Pr_\psi(dY)=\|M_t(Y_t)\psi\|^2\mathbb Q(dY),\qquad \psi_t=\frac{M_t(Y_t)\psi}{\|M_t(Y_t)\psi\|}, (18.13)

where Q\mathbb Q is reference Wiener measure. Hence the finite event maps It(E)(ρ)=EMtρMtdQ\mathcal I_t(E)(\rho)=\int_E M_t\rho M_t^\dagger\,d\mathbb Q are normalized CP maps with the displayed actual continuation and arbitrary inaccessible references.

Proof

Under Q\mathbb Q, the explicit held multiplier solves dM=L2Mdt/2+LMdYdM=-L^2M\,dt/2+LM\,dY. Gaussian integration gives

EQMtMt=jEQeβjYtβj2t/2Pj=I. \mathbb E_{\mathbb Q}M_t^\dagger M_t =\sum_j\mathbb E_{\mathbb Q}e^{\beta_jY_t-\beta_j^2t/2}P_j=I.

The bounded-coefficient likelihood argument proved in Theorem 21.1 identifies this normalized multiplier law with (18.11), including its reference extension. Here its held diagonal specialization supplies the explicit Gaussian solution; that later theorem treats the general Hamiltonian and predictable-control propagator. Positivity and complete positivity follow directly from the displayed event-map integral.

The change of measure does not select its own physical measure: selection occurred through CPC or the tag bridge, with the remaining shared-Gaussian and positive-lift premises. The Gaussian-mixture representation of the final pointer density introduces no ontic eigenlabel. Installing such a label in the physical filtration could change the Wiener property required by (18.1).

If the calibrations are distinct, each bounded martingale pjp_j converges and the limit is a vertex with probability pj(0)p_j(0). Indeed, for V=jβj2pjβ2V=\sum_j\beta_j^2p_j-\overline\beta^2, Itô gives dβ=VdWd\overline\beta=VdW and dV=μ3dWV2dtdV=\mu_3dW-V^2dt. Thus E0V2dtV(0)\mathbb E\int_0^\infty V^2dt\le V(0); convergence of pp forces V0V\to0. The limiting support contains one calibration, and bounded convergence gives its probability. Equal calibrations remain an unresolved coherent sector. Every initially positive population remains positive at finite time because (18.12) is invertible.

For a finite sequence of held readers, admitted coherent gates, fresh ready resources and record-dependent controls, multiply the full retained-bank factors. The joint density is KωΨ2\|K_\omega\Psi\|^2 against input-independent reference kernels; normalized primitive laws give normalization by successive integration. Tensor identities retain inaccessible references. In the tag realization, the disjoint target and tag factors commute, and their stopped resource kernels are input independent conditional on the record. Therefore both evaluation orders have the same density NMΨ2\|N M\Psi\|^2, proving that the tag assumptions have a common nonempty realization. This supplies CPC for the generated library. It does not prove universal admission of every extra source port or select simultaneous arbitrary noncommuting feedback SDEs.

18.5 Decisive alternatives to overstrong selection claims

Example 18.6 (An unread affine channel with the wrong joint law)

For a qubit let dp=cp(1p)dWdp=c p(1-p)dW and dY=βpdt+dWdY=\beta p\,dt+dW, with positive lift. With f(p)=p(1p)f(p)=\sqrt{p(1-p)}, f=1/(4f3)f''=-1/(4f^3) and the generator sends ff to c2f/8-c^2f/8. Thus the unread channel is CP dephasing with coherence ec2t/8e^{-c^2t/8} for every cc. The equal eigenstate mixture and equal +,|+\rangle,|-\rangle mixture both have matrix I/2I/2, but the initial derivatives of E[Ytpt]\mathbb E[Y_tp_t] differ by (cβ)/4(c-\beta)/4. For a finite tag with success rsr_s, the exact order discrepancy is

EAB[Yt1K]EBA[Yt1K]=rs(cβ)0tE[pu(1pu)]du. \mathbb E_{A\to B}[Y_t1_K]-\mathbb E_{B\to A}[Y_t1_K] =r_s(c-\beta)\int_0^t\mathbb E[p_u(1-p_u)]\,du.

The integral is positive for an interior input. Clipping YtY_t at a sufficiently large finite level preserves a nonzero bounded-record distinction. Unread affinity does not replace the joint event-and-continuation identity.

Example 18.7 (Terminal Born weights with wrong continuation)

The absorbed Wright–Fisher process dp=2κp(1p)dWdp=\sqrt{2\kappa p(1-p)}dW has terminal probability pp and mean absorption time [plogp+(1p)log(1p)]/κ-[p\log p+(1-p)\log(1-p)]/\kappa. These follow respectively from stopped martingales and the boundary-value equation κp(1p)u=1\kappa p(1-p)u''=-1. With fixed phase, however, the generator sends f(p)=p(1p)f(p)=\sqrt{p(1-p)} to κ/(4f)-\kappa/(4f). Compare the equal mixture of positive-phase rays with p=1/4,3/4p=1/4,3/4 with the mixture of +,|+\rangle,|-\rangle of probabilities (2+3)/4,(23)/4(2+\sqrt3)/4,(2-\sqrt3)/4. Both initial off-diagonal entries are 3/4\sqrt3/4. Their derivatives are κ/3-\kappa/\sqrt3 and κ3/4-\kappa\sqrt3/4. Hence their unread states have trace distance κt/(43)+o(t)\kappa t/(4\sqrt3)+o(t). Stopping inside small neighborhoods of the initial interior points justifies this expansion. A later finite noncommuting reader of visibility 12eX>01-2e_X>0 detects the difference. Correct terminal weights do not supply coherent continuation.

Example 18.8 (Phase backaction survives CPC)

Put aj=βj/2a_j=\beta_j/2 and choose arbitrary real θj\theta_j. The multipliers

Mtθ(y)=jeajyaj2teiθj(yajt)PjM_t^\theta(y)=\sum_j e^{a_jy-a_j^2t} e^{i\theta_j(y-a_jt)}P_j (18.14)

have exactly the same likelihood and populations as (18.12), and form normalized CP instruments. Their unread off-diagonal magnitudes acquire the additional factor e(θjθk)2t/2e^{-(\theta_j-\theta_k)^2t/2}, as direct Gaussian integration shows. A later noncommuting probe distinguishes them unless the recorded phase is compensated. Positive lifting selects the phase-free member; CPC and the diagonal bridge alone do not.