Measured evidence · DS-STABLE-BASINS-GATE-SCANS

The margin gate was probed numerically

Measuredindependently auditedpublication: internalno direct precedent found

Read the proof and evidence →

Meaning

Finite searches compare empty and inhabited regimes on specified laws; they are measured probes, not existence decisions in general.

Statement

Measured evidence only. The original closed-form instrument and an independent audit instrument reproduce the exact sign-split algebra, Gaussian rank collapse, a mix3 root near beta = 0, and the qualitative centered-versus-noncentered library behavior. The original product-bimodal and dependent-(L) scans found no roots within beta in [-2.5,2.5] and at most three continued Lloyd branches; this is windowed finite-search evidence, not proof that the gate is empty. The mix3 search found one root near beta = 0 with cuts near +-1.00476, lambda_min near 1.7364, and value numerically equal to the efficient interval optimum; it does not prove global uniqueness, sufficiency, or an empirical transfer theorem. The Gaussian sign-split family has exact profiled value 2/pi and maximum lambda_min 1/pi; the reported v_3-v_2 = 0.173206 is numerical.

Assumptions

  • population quantities are closed-form Phi/phi mixture algebra, no sampling; Monte Carlo appears only in violation scans and library runs with deterministic seeds SEED_BASE = 20260831

  • measured, never theorem authority; scan grids and branch multistarts are finite - absence of roots on a grid is evidence, the proof is DS17.1

  • the original scan window was not derived from 2M/kappa for a declared kappa and its branch cap could miss isolated roots

  • independent audit provenance and tolerances are stored as separate mode artifacts under AUDITS/artifacts/AUDIT-DS-STABLE-BASINS-001/

windowed falsification evidence that did not falsify DS17.1, plus a measured off-class witness that scopes it

Where it stops

Audit-hardened measured node. No numerical no-root or unique-root statement carries theorem authority; the centered obstruction is proved independently. Search windows must be tied to an explicit kappa, and observed mix3 behavior is per-law evidence only.

Bounded by

  • Counterexample fixtureCE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-MINIMAL-001

    None: support-minimal atomic boundary witness for the (M5)-free sign-split mechanism; it is not a counterexample to DS17, whose population obstruction assumes atomlessness and (M4), and whose empirical conclusion assumes (M5).

Closest prior work

Relationships

Rests on

The full chain beneath it

Enables

Raises

Open next door

Local graph
Local map of Measured gate scans: eight (L)-laws empty, mix3 inhabited free, sign-split family at v_21 prerequisites to the left, 1 results it enables or questions it raises to the right, 1 boundary cases below.Inhabitation reduces to a scalar root equation per lawInhabitation reduces…Vector-parameter margins dichotomy beyond the scalar DS15 classVector-parameter marg…Measured gate scans: eight (L)-laws empty, mix3 inhabited free, sign-split family at v_2Measured gate scans:…CE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-MINIMAL-001CE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-M…
Prerequisites to the left, what it enables or raises to the right, boundary cases below. Open in the map.

Proof

DS17. Inhabitation of the margin-certified branch: the conditional-centering obstruction and the fixed-point gate

Independent audit (31 Aug 2026, AUDITS/AUDIT-DS-STABLE-BASINS-001.md). All four nodes are hardened. The obstruction and eventual-emptiness theorem survive. The audit separates the root equation, which remains meaningful at a singular binned nuisance block, from regular tilt consistency Bq∗=βB_q^*=\beta, which does not; restricts the LCM conclusions and Gaussian sign-split construction to their exact scopes; and demotes every finite root scan to windowed measured evidence. A numerical scan cannot decide the gate for a law, and a root is necessary, never sufficient, for empirical inhabitation.

Normalization (protocol A). Criterion: in-bin profiled DsD_s. Levels: population_quantizer (existence/non-existence of self-consistent rules) and empirical_to_population (the inhabitation consequence). Decision variables: ordinary one-point exchange-stable finite labelings (DS14's hypotheses — never stability-under-constraint) and population strip rules. Setting as in DS14/DS15: dψ=dλ=1d_\psi=d_\lambda=1, K≥3K\ge3, ES=0ES=0, E∥S∥2<∞E\|S\|^2<\infty, I=E[SS⊤]≻0I=E[SS^\top]\succ0, efficient score s^=Sψ−B∗Sλ\hat s=S_\psi-B^*S_\lambda, B∗=Iψλ/IλλB^*=I_{\psi\lambda}/I_{\lambda\lambda}. For β∈R\beta\in\mathbb R write Tβ=Sψ−βSλT_\beta=S_\psi-\beta S_\lambda; a strip rule at tilt β\beta is a KK-cell interval partition of TβT_\beta with positive masses. Neither (S) nor (R) is assumed anywhere in DS17.1–DS17.2; (L) is the DS15 conditional centering E[Sλ∣s^]=0E[S_\lambda\mid\hat s]=0 a.s. Deployability question decided: is OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS(a) — almost-sure sequences of margin-certified exchange-stable labelings — inhabited on the DS15/DS16 class? Information-loss implication: on that class the certified branch retains nothing because it is empty; off the class the gate identity below is only a necessary population test. Conditional centering is a property of the population score law; it is not, and does not authorize, sample centering or recentering of score rows.

Lemma DS17.1a (tilt-residual identity; any law, any partition)

For any KK-cell partition qq with masses Wb>0W_b>0, centroids (μψ,b,μλ,b)(\mu_{\psi,b},\mu_{\lambda,b}), and any β\beta, set tb=μψ,b−βμλ,bt_b=\mu_{\psi,b}-\beta\mu_{\lambda,b}. Then ∑bWbtbμλ,b=Iψλ(q)−βIλλ(q)\sum_bW_bt_b\mu_{\lambda,b}=I_{\psi\lambda}(q)-\beta I_{\lambda\lambda}(q), so whenever Iλλ(q)>0I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)>0,

B∗(Iq)−β=∑bWbtbμλ,bIλλ(q).B^*(I_q)-\beta=\frac{\sum_bW_bt_b\mu_{\lambda,b}}{I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)} .

For a strip rule at tilt β\beta, tb=E[Tβ∣Ab]t_b=E[T_\beta\mid A_b] and the numerator is E[h(Tβ)Sλ]E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda], where h=∑btb1Abh=\sum_bt_b1_{A_b} is the non-decreasing step function sending each TβT_\beta-interval to its conditional mean (strictly increasing values across cells, for an atomless law with positive masses). Proof: expand the definitions; for the strip form use the tower property ∑bWbtbμλ,b=E[ E[T∣σ(q)] E[Sλ∣σ(q)] ]=E[h(T)Sλ]\sum_bW_bt_b\mu_{\lambda,b} =E[\,E[T\mid\sigma(q)]\,E[S_\lambda\mid\sigma(q)]\,]=E[h(T)S_\lambda], since h(T)=E[T∣σ(q)]h(T)=E[T\mid\sigma(q)] is σ(q)\sigma(q)-measurable and bounded (∣h∣≤max⁡b∣tb∣<∞|h|\le\max_b|t_b|<\infty). ∎

Two immediate readings. (i) Call the numerator condition E[h(Tβ)Sλ]=0E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda]=0 root consistency. When Iq,λλ>0I_{q,\lambda\lambda}>0, it is equivalent to the regular notion of tilt consistency B∗(Iq)=βB^*(I_q)=\beta. When Iq,λλ=0I_{q,\lambda\lambda}=0, B∗(Iq)B^*(I_q) is undefined and only the root equation may be stated. A self-consistent efficient-Voronoi rule with a positive nuisance block is regularly tilt-consistent at β=Bq∗\beta=B^*_q by construction. (ii) At any regular tilt-consistent pair the projected centroids satisfy eb=μψ,b−βμλ,b=tbe_b=\mu_{\psi,b}-\beta\mu_{\lambda,b}=t_b identically — projection linearity, no law hypothesis — so the nearest-centroid cuts are exactly the Lloyd midpoints of law⁡(Tβ)\operatorname{law}(T_\beta): self-consistency decomposes into "cuts are Lloyd-stationary for TβT_\beta" plus the scalar root equation E[h(Tβ)Sλ]=0E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda]=0. This is the gate every later scan tests.

Theorem DS17.1 (conditional-centering obstruction; population)

Let PP be atomless, in class (L), with ES=0ES=0, E∥S∥2<∞E\|S\|^2<\infty, I≻0I\succ0. Then every root-consistent strip rule has Iq,λλ=0I_{q,\lambda\lambda}=0, at every tilt β\beta and every K≥2K\ge2. Equivalently, no regular tilt-consistent strip rule exists. In particular, there is no full-rank bounded-study stationary rule with pairwise-distinct projected centroids. No LCM, ellipticity, independence, or log-concavity is assumed: (L) alone.

Proof. Write δ=β−B∗\delta=\beta-B^*, so Tβ=s^−δSλT_\beta=\hat s-\delta S_\lambda.

Case δ=0\delta=0. Cells are s^\hat s-measurable, so Wbμλ,b=E[Sλ1Ab]=E[ E[Sλ∣s^]1Ab]=0W_b\mu_{\lambda,b}=E[S_\lambda1_{A_b}]=E[\,E[S_\lambda\mid\hat s]1_{A_b}]=0 by (L): Iλλ(q)=∑bWbμλ,b2=0I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)=\sum_bW_b\mu_{\lambda,b}^2=0 directly.

Case δ>0\delta>0. Condition on s^\hat s: the map x↦h(s^−δx)x\mapsto h(\hat s-\delta x) is non-increasing (hh non-decreasing). The Chebyshev association inequality for a non-increasing transform — for an i.i.d. conditional copy X′X' of X=SλX=S_\lambda given s^\hat s, 2 Cov(h(s^−δX),X∣s^)=E[(h(s^−δX)−h(s^−δX′))(X−X′)∣s^]≤02\,\mathrm{Cov}(h(\hat s-\delta X),X\mid\hat s) =E[(h(\hat s-\delta X)-h(\hat s-\delta X'))(X-X')\mid\hat s]\le0 termwise — gives, with (L) killing the product of conditional means,

E[h(Tβ)Sλ∣s^]≤E[h(Tβ)∣s^] E[Sλ∣s^]=0a.s.E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda\mid\hat s] \le E[h(T_\beta)\mid\hat s]\,E[S_\lambda\mid\hat s]=0 \quad\text{a.s.}

Integrating, E[h(Tβ)Sλ]≤0E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda]\le0. Now suppose Iλλ(q)>0I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)>0 and root consistency. By DS17.1a the numerator is exactly 00, so the conditional inequality is an equality a.s. Equality in the termwise-nonpositive covariance forces, for Ps^P_{\hat s}-a.e. value of s^\hat s: (h(s^−δX)−h(s^−δX′))(X−X′)=0(h(\hat s-\delta X)-h(\hat s-\delta X'))(X-X')=0 a.s., i.e. h(s^−δSλ)h(\hat s-\delta S_\lambda) is a.s. constant given s^\hat s (if SλS_\lambda is conditionally degenerate the same constancy holds trivially). Since hh takes distinct values on distinct cells, every cell indicator 1Ab(Tβ)1_{A_b}(T_\beta) is then a.s. s^\hat s-measurable, and the Case-δ=0\delta=0 computation applies verbatim: μλ,b=0\mu_{\lambda,b}=0 for all bb, so Iλλ(q)=0I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)=0 — contradiction.

Case δ<0\delta<0. x↦h(s^−δx)x\mapsto h(\hat s-\delta x) is non-decreasing; the inequality reverses (E[h(T)Sλ]≥0E[h(T)S_\lambda]\ge0) and the same equality analysis applies. Finally, if Iλλ(q)=0I_{\lambda\lambda}(q)=0, the asserted conclusion already holds (and PSD also forces Iψλ(q)=0I_{\psi\lambda}(q)=0); no quotient or value of Bq∗B_q^* is used in this singular case. ∎

Consequences. Under (L) a bounded-study stationary rule with Iq≻0I_q\succ0 (full rank) cannot have pairwise-distinct projected centroids: distinctness plus tie-nullity (below) would make it a genuine tilt-consistent strip rule, forcing Iλλ=0I_{\lambda\lambda}=0 and, by Iψλ2≤IψψIλλI_{\psi\lambda}^2\le I_{\psi\psi}I_{\lambda\lambda} (PSD), rank ≤1\le1. Margin-compatible stationary configurations on class (L) are therefore all wasted-cell structures in the DS12 sense — the merged branch of DS17.3.

Lemma DS17.0 (pathwise DS14′)

Fix KK and rational κ,c0,γ>0\kappa,c_0,\gamma>0, and let PP satisfy (M1) and (M4). There is one probability-one event Ω0\Omega_0 — the intersection, over the countable family of rational constants and integer truncation radii, of: the SLLN events for PN∥S∥2P_N\|S\|^2 and PNSP_NS; the DS14 Step-2 Glivenko–Cantelli event over the fixed slab family; and the C1 uniform moment law over the compact affine-max class with parameters bounded by (c0,κ,γ,M)(c_0,\kappa,\gamma,M) — such that on Ω0\Omega_0 the following holds for every (arbitrarily data-dependent, merely ω\omega-wise) choice of one-point exchange-stable KK-cell labelings z(N)z^{(N)}, N∈NN\in\mathcal N, ∣N∣=∞|\mathcal N|=\infty, whose margins (M2)+(M3)+(M5) hold at (c0,κ,γ)(c_0,\kappa,\gamma) for every N∈NN\in\mathcal N: along a sub-subsequence of N\mathcal N the companion parameters converge, and the limit q∗q^* is a self-consistent efficient-Voronoi quantizer with λmin⁡(Iq∗)≥κ\lambda_{\min}(I_{q^*})\ge\kappa, cell masses ≥c0\ge c_0, and pairwise-distinct projected centroids separated by ≥γ\ge\gamma.

Proof. DS14's five steps consume only: the margins at the indices actually used; the uniform laws — all over fixed function classes after the audit's repair (AUDITS/AUDIT-DS-POPULATION-BRIDGE-001.md §8), hence valid simultaneously for every candidate sequence on Ω0\Omega_0; and compactness of the explicit parameter set, which supplies the convergent sub-subsequence. Restricting the index set to N\mathcal N leaves every step intact (the sample is the same; limits along N\mathcal N use the same events). No step selects a null set depending on the sequence, so the conclusion is pathwise on Ω0\Omega_0; measurable selection is not needed because the argument runs at fixed ω\omega. λmin⁡\lambda_{\min} passes to the limit by its 1-Lipschitz continuity in operator norm; separation and masses pass by DS14 Step 3. This is the DS16 §"proof of (1)" quantifier idiom applied to DS14. ∎

Theorem DS17.2 (inhabitation disproved on the whole class; eventual emptiness)

Let PP be in class (L) with (M1) and (M4) and I≻0I\succ0 — the DS15/DS16 law class satisfies this, and neither (S) nor (R) is needed. Then almost surely, for every rational κ,c0,γ>0\kappa,c_0,\gamma>0 there is N0(ω)<∞N_0(\omega)<\infty such that for all N≥N0N\ge N_0 no one-point exchange-stable KK-cell labeling of the sample satisfies (M2)+(M3)+(M5) at (c0,κ,γ)(c_0,\kappa,\gamma) at all. In particular OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS(a) is disproved: on the entire conditionally centered class there is no almost-sure margin-certified exchange-stable sequence, for any margins; DS14's hypothesis set is asymptotically empty, and real margins at real constants are covered by shrinking them to rationals.

Proof. Work on Ω0\Omega_0. If some (c0,κ,γ)(c_0,\kappa,\gamma)-margin- compatible stable labeling existed for infinitely many NN, choose one per such NN (ω\omega-wise) and apply DS17.0: a limit q∗q^* exists — bounded-study stationary with λmin⁡(Iq∗)≥κ>0\lambda_{\min}(I_{q^*})\ge\kappa>0 and pairwise-distinct projected centroids. By DS14 Step 4 the limit is the nearest-projected-centroid rule of its own centroids and metric (the audited identification — not bare DS12, whose stationarity alone would tolerate coincident centroids); for dψ=1d_\psi=1 the scalar metric Sψ(Iq∗)−1>0S_\psi(I_{q^*})^{-1}>0 cancels, so q∗q^* is a strip rule at tilt β∗=Bq∗∗\beta^*=B^*_{q^*}, genuinely tilt-consistent, with tie sets PP-null by (M4). Theorem DS17.1 gives Iq∗,λλ=0<κ≤λmin⁡(Iq∗)≤Iq∗,λλI_{q^*,\lambda\lambda}=0<\kappa\le\lambda_{\min}(I_{q^*})\le I_{q^*,\lambda\lambda} — contradiction. Union over the countable rational constants. ∎

Corollaries (instances). Jointly Gaussian and atomless elliptical laws with Σ≻0\Sigma\succ0 are in (L) (linear conditional means) and satisfy (M4) (below), so the canonical law is covered. Product laws Sψ⊥SλS_\psi\perp S_\lambda, ESλ=0ES_\lambda=0, are in (L) via independence (B∗=0B^*=0, s^=Sψ\hat s=S_\psi) — every bimodal-nuisance product law scanned below is an instance. For centered LCM laws with nonsingular covariance (linear conditional means along every nondegenerate tilt, e.g. elliptical), (L) follows by applying LCM to s^\hat s, since Cov⁡(Sλ,s^)=0\operatorname{Cov}(S_\lambda,\hat s)=0. There is also an independent one-line second proof: cell means of a strip rule are collinear, μb=θ tb\mu_b=\theta\,t_b with θ=Cov(S,Tβ)/Var(Tβ)\theta=\mathrm{Cov}(S,T_\beta)/\mathrm{Var}(T_\beta) and Var(Tβ)≥λmin⁡(I)(1+β2)>0\mathrm{Var}(T_\beta)\ge\lambda_{\min}(I)(1+\beta^2)>0, so Iq=(∑bWbtb2) θθ⊤I_q=(\sum_bW_bt_b^2)\,\theta\theta^\top has rank ≤1\le1 and λmin⁡(Iq)=0\lambda_{\min}(I_q)=0; moreover the tilt-consistency equation on a Gaussian is the Möbius fixed point β=(a−βc)/(c−βd)\beta=(a-\beta c)/(c-\beta d), i.e. β2d−2βc+a=0⟺Var(Tβ)=0\beta^2d-2\beta c+a=0\Longleftrightarrow\mathrm{Var}(T_\beta)=0, with discriminant 4(c2−ad)<04(c^2-ad)<0: no real solution at any correlation.

(M4) for atomless elliptical laws (d=2d=2, Σ≻0\Sigma\succ0). Writing S=RΛUS=R\Lambda U with UU uniform on the circle: for unit vv, P(∣v⊤S−c∣≤t)≤P(R≤t k1)+sup⁡r>tk1PU(∣v⊤ΛU−c/r∣≤t/r)≤P(R≤tk1)+k2t1/4P(|v^\top S-c|\le t)\le P(R\le\sqrt t\,k_1)+\sup_{r>\sqrt t k_1} P_U(|v^\top\Lambda U-c/r|\le t/r)\le P(R\le\sqrt tk_1)+k_2t^{1/4} — the angular arc a slab cuts from an ellipse of radius rr has measure O(t/r)O(\sqrt{t/r}) even at tangency — and P(R≤ε)↓0P(R\le\varepsilon)\downarrow0 by atomlessness at the origin: a uniform φ(t)↓0\varphi(t)\downarrow0.

Theorem DS17.3 (LCM merged-branch classification: margins survive only in wasted cells, and are never compilable)

Let PP be atomless with (M4)-tie-nullity and LCM on the relevant tilt range, and let qq be bounded-study stationary with Wb>0W_b>0 and Iq≻0I_q\succ0 (the merged branch: (M5) dropped). Then:

  1. the projected centroids are not pairwise distinct (else DS12 deployability (i)+(ii) reproduces qq as a strip rule and the LCM rank bound — or Theorem DS17.1, since LCM⇒\Rightarrow(L) — contradicts Iq≻0I_q\succ0);
  2. the reduced rule ρ′\rho' (merge coincident-ee groups; DS12) is a genuine TBq∗T_{B^*_q}-interval rule with K′≤K−1K'\le K-1 cells and rank⁡(Iρ′)≤1\operatorname{rank}(I_{\rho'})\le1, so λmin⁡(Iρ′)=0\lambda_{\min}(I_{\rho'})=0: the compilable reduction never carries a nuisance margin;
  3. value identity: Φ(q)=∑groups gWgE[eq(S)∣Gg]2\Phi(q)=\sum_{\text{groups }g}W_gE[e_q(S)\mid G_g]^2 with eq(s)=sψ−Bq∗sλe_q(s)=s_\psi-B^*_qs_\lambda — the between-value of law⁡(eq(S))\operatorname{law}(e_q(S)) on at most K−1K-1 intervals (proof: Φ(q)=min⁡B∑bWb(μψ,b−Bμλ,b)2\Phi(q)=\min_B\sum_bW_b(\mu_{\psi,b}-B\mu_{\lambda,b})^2 attained at B=Bq∗B=B^*_q by the normal equation, ebe_b constant on groups, and ∑b∈gWbeb=E[eq1Gg]\sum_{b\in g}W_be_b=E[e_q1_{G_g}]); always Φ(q)≤vK\Phi(q)\le v_K (DS15 Lemma 1);
  4. nonemptiness: on N(0,I2)N(0,I_2) the sign-split family — the threshold cell {Sψ≥0}\{S_\psi\ge0\} plus any nontrivial measurable split of the left half determined by SλS_\lambda (e.g. {Sλ>v}\{S_\lambda>v\} versus {Sλ≤v}\{S_\lambda\le v\}) — is bounded-study stationary with Bq∗=0B^*_q=0, coincident left projected centroids, Iq=diag⁡(2/π, Iλλ(split))≻0I_q=\operatorname{diag}(2/\pi,\,I_{\lambda\lambda}(\text{split}))\succ0, λmin⁡\lambda_{\min} up to 1/π1/\pi (at v=0v=0), and profiled value exactly v2=2/πv_2=2/\pi for every member. The population constraint class {λmin⁡(Iq)≥κ}\{\lambda_{\min}(I_q)\ge\kappa\} of DS16's v∗(κ)v^*(\kappa) is therefore nonempty for κ≤1/π\kappa\le1/\pi on the canonical law — the audit's attainment subproblem has a nonvacuous feasible set. This proves neither attainment/continuity of v∗(κ)v^*(\kappa) nor existence of empirical stable sequences. For this explicit family, the loss against the scalar Gaussian three-bin optimum is the measured quantity v3−v2≈0.1732v_3-v_2\approx0.1732 (=0.809826−2/π=0.809826-2/\pi); it is not a lower bound for every stationary inhabitant.

Exact-rational verification: the K=3K=3 sign-split sibling of CE-DS-POP-WASTED-CELLS-001 on the same 8-atom law has Iq=diag⁡(4,9/8)I_q=\operatorname{diag}(4,9/8), Φ=4\Phi=4 equal to the K′=2K'=2 group between-value, projected centroids (−2,−2,2)(-2,-2,2), zero first-order violations, and singular reduced nuisance block — serialized as CE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-MARGIN-001 and CI-pinned. Under bare (L), conclusion 1 still holds (via Theorem DS17.1), while conclusion 2's rank collapse of the reduced rule is LCM-scoped: a non-LCM (L)-law may leave its reduced strips with a nonzero nuisance block, and only the fine configuration's coincidence is forced.

The audit also records the support-minimal atomic boundary at N=K=3N=K=3 as CE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-MINIMAL-001. It has the same coincident-centroid and singular-reduction mechanism, but bounded-study stationarity is vacuous on its singleton atoms. The eight-atom fixture remains the structured symmetric exact control; it is not globally support-minimal.

Corollary DS17.4 (the fixed-point gate, and what it costs off the class)

For any atomless law with (M4): if OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS(a) full-triple inhabitation holds at (κ,c0,γ)(\kappa,c_0,\gamma), then there exist ∣β∣≤2M/κ|\beta|\le2M/\kappa and a Lloyd-stationary KK-interval quantizer of law⁡(Tβ)\operatorname{law}(T_\beta) (any centroid-midpoint fixed point, not only the optimum) whose strip rule qq satisfies the root equation E[h(Tβ)Sλ]=0E[h(T_\beta)S_\lambda]=0 with λmin⁡(Iq)≥κ\lambda_{\min}(I_q)\ge\kappa, masses ≥c0\ge c_0, and tt-mean separation ≥γ\ge\gamma. DS17.1 proves the gate empty on all of class (L). Numerical root searches can probe but cannot decide this gate for a law. Off the class, the mix3 scan finds a root at β=0\beta=0, cuts ±1.00476\pm1.00476, with measured Iλλ=λmin⁡=1.7364I_{\lambda\lambda}=\lambda_{\min}=1.7364 and value equal to the efficient interval optimum to the reported tolerance. This is per-law evidence that a margin may have negligible price; it is not a general theorem and does not establish the empirical transfer required by OPEN-DS-MARGINS-NONCENTERED(a).

Self-adversarial notes (protocol G)

  • Strictness and ties. Finite labelings may carry exact ties and duplicates; nothing in DS17.2 constrains them — stability is a hypothesis. Population tie sets are (M4)-null; the equality analysis in DS17.1 handles conditionally degenerate SλS_\lambda explicitly.
  • Singleton/empty cells. Excluded at the population limit by (M2); finite singletons are allowed and irrelevant.
  • Duplicate scores. Allowed; DS14's Steps 1–3 already cover split atoms.
  • Singular information. I≻0I\succ0 is a hypothesis on the law; post-move singular states never enter (DS13 covers them upstream in DS14).
  • Nuisance singularity. The conclusion is nuisance singularity; the margin hypothesis (M3) uses λmin⁡≤Iλλ\lambda_{\min}\le I_{\lambda\lambda}, so the contradiction is against the weaker block bound — no gap.
  • Atomic laws. DS17.1 needs atomlessness through the strict increase of interval means and DS12/DS14's own hypotheses; the 8-atom fixture verifies algebra, never the population statement (DS12 necessity is vacuous on atoms — wasted-cells precedent). The audit's support-minimal three-atom fixture makes that boundary explicit.
  • Hidden compactness. Only DS14's audited explicit compact class is used.
  • First-order-to-finite jumps. None: the finite half is DS14 verbatim; DS17 adds population algebra plus the pathwise quantifier.
  • Empirical-to-population jumps. Only DS17.0's fixed-class events — the audit-repaired uniform laws; no new uniform law is introduced.
  • Score-estimation error. Excluded; exact scores (“Estimated scores and classifiers” unchanged).
  • New-event extension. DS17 strengthens the refusal: on class (L) there is asymptotically nothing to compile in the certified branch; no new inductive claim is made.
  • Why the census witnesses don't contradict DS17.2. The margin-retaining stable states at N≤14N\le14 (CE-DS-STABLE-MARGIN-RETAINING-001) are pre-asymptotic: DS17.2's N0(ω)N_0(\omega) is finite but not uniform, and the grid laws are atomic emulations. The theorem predicts their margins die as NN grows — exactly the DS16 library measurement (funnel at N=100N=100–10001000) and the geometry scan below.

Measured (gate scans; falsification evidence that failed to falsify)

Instrument py/ds_stable_basins.py (closed-form Gaussian-mixture strip moments, validated in selftest against the public scorequant.IntegrationSource tensor Gauss–Legendre quadrature at 10−910^{-9} and the exact 8-atom rationals; artifacts with full provenance under artifacts/DS-STABLE-BASINS/):

  • Gaussian laws (ρ∈{0,0.6,0.9}\rho\in\{0,0.6,0.9\} and an anisotropic case): at every tilt on a 241-point grid, λmin⁡(Iq(β))≤2.4×10−16\lambda_{\min}(I_q(\beta))\le2.4\times10^{-16} (exact rank one); the tilt-residual is zero-free (discriminant <0<0); the Möbius iteration never converges (elliptic orbit) — row N-DS-BASINS-GAUSS.
  • Product bimodal (L)-laws (m∈{0.75,1,1.5,2,3}m\in\{0.75,1,1.5,2,3\}, s=0.4s=0.4): the branch-tracked root scan over β∈[−2.5,2.5]\beta\in[-2.5,2.5], tracking up to 3 Lloyd-stationary branches per tilt (asymmetric mode-splitting branches included), found zero self-consistent roots in that finite window and branch set. The window is not the full compact gate range for an unstated κ\kappa, and the branch cap cannot exclude isolated roots.
  • Dependent (L)-laws xcorr(c) (equal mixtures of ±c\pm c-correlated standard Gaussians, c∈{0.5,0.8,0.95}c\in\{0.5,0.8,0.95\}; (L) by branch symmetry, LCM fails off β=0\beta=0): zero roots — both scans in row N-DS-BASINS-CLASS-L-ROOTS. Eight (L)-laws, three structural families, zero gate inhabitants: the theorem's prediction, tested before its proof was trusted.
  • Sign-split family on N(0,I2)N(0,I_2): Φ−2/π=0\Phi-2/\pi=0 to machine precision across the split parameter v∈[−1,1]v\in[-1,1], Iψλ=0I_{\psi\lambda}=0, λmin⁡\lambda_{\min} maximal =1/π=1/\pi at v=0v=0; v3−v2=0.173206v_3-v_2=0.173206 — row N-DS-BASINS-SIGNSPLIT.
  • mix3 (off-class control): one root found — β=0\beta=0, cuts ±1.00476\pm1.00476, λmin⁡=1.7364\lambda_{\min}=1.7364, value 2.68936=v32.68936=v_3 to 10−610^{-6} (price ≈0\approx0), zero Monte-Carlo rule violations; the finite-difference family Hessian at the root has gradient 00 and eigenvalues (−2.146,−0.258,−0.186)(-2.146,-0.258,-0.186): a strict local maximum of the population value in the rule family, the second-order input any off-class transfer theorem (OPEN-DS-MARGINS-NONCENTERED(a)) would consume — row N-DS-BASINS-MIX3.
  • Seeded library ascent at scale (public API, N∈{300,1000,3000}N\in\{300,1000,3000\}, 3 reps): all 63 terminals exchange-stable. gauss06: λmin⁡∈[5×10−5,0.012]\lambda_{\min}\in[5\times10^{-5},0.012] with NI^11≈0.3N\hat I_{11}\approx0.3–77 at every seed — the disproof's finite face. mix3: the population-fixed-point seeding terminates at the same terminal as the efficient and k-means seeds in 9/9 runs, with λmin⁡=1.73\lambda_{\min}=1.73–1.831.83 and log-gap ≤10−5\le10^{-5} at N≥1000N\ge1000; one random-seed run stranded at a degenerate inferior terminal (λmin⁡=5×10−4\lambda_{\min}=5\times10^{-4}, gap 0.210.21) — off-class margins are free at the good optimum, but bad local terminals still exist — row N-DS-BASINS-LIBRARY.
  • Geometry of the DS16 terminals (420 recorded ascent terminals plus the margin-retaining witness): the witness agrees exactly with its own companion rule at N=8N=8 (B^∗=0.497\hat B^*=0.497, separation 0.3250.325); on centered06 only 2%2\% of stable terminals are companion-exact (median disagreement 18%18\%, median λmin⁡=0.034\lambda_{\min}=0.034), on mix3 61%61\% are exact (median λmin⁡=1.06\lambda_{\min}=1.06) — the class boundary of DS17.1 visible in the finite states — row N-DS-BASINS-GEOMETRY.

Verdict: OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS(a) and the compile consequence

  • Disproved, on the whole class. On every (L)+(M1)+(M4) law — all of DS15/DS16's class, jointly Gaussian and elliptical laws in particular — the margin-certified branch is almost surely eventually empty: not merely uninhabited by sequences, but devoid of any single margin-compatible exchange-stable labeling for all large NN. The DS14 companion path on this class is vacuous asymptotically; compile_quantizer's refusal needs no certificate carve-out there, and a margin-constrained solver (an earlier, since-closed question/OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS(c)) cannot terminate at ordinary-stable margin states eventually — any terminal it certifies is stable only under the constraint.
  • The merged branch survives but compiles to nothing. Dropping (M5), margin-compatible stationary configurations exist on the canonical law (sign-split family, λmin⁡\lambda_{\min} up to 1/π1/\pi), all wasted-cell structures whose compilable reduction has λmin⁡=0\lambda_{\min}=0 and whose value is pinned at v2v_2 in every scanned instance — retention is bought only by spending cells on profiled-information-free splits.
  • Off the class the population gate can be inhabited and may be cheap. mix3's gate inhabitant is the efficient optimum itself (λmin⁡=1.74\lambda_{\min}=1.74, price ≈0\approx0) in the measured family. This one law does not support a general claim that certification is free. The deployment-relevant remainder moves to OPEN-DS-MARGINS-NONCENTERED branch (a) (non-centered laws) with the DS17.4 gate identity as its population test, and to the DS16 attainment question, whose feasible class DS17.3(4) proves nonempty.
  • Deployment statement (required by the study). An inhabited DS14 sequence: impossible on class (L) (this theorem). A finite diagnostic: still legitimate as a diagnostic (the N=8N=8 witness is even companion-exact) but now known to be transient on the class — it certifies nothing asymptotic. A constrained terminal: the only object a margin-constrained solver can deliver on the class, and it is not ordinary-exchange-stable eventually; any future ProfiledMarginPolicy surface must present it as constrained, priced (v^K−Φ^s\hat v_K-\hat\Phi_s), and non-inductive on this class.

Stop condition 2 (disproved) of the study is hit on the study's own class, with the obstruction's boundary serialized (CE-DS-LCM-SIGNSPLIT-MARGIN-001: (M5) is load-bearing) and the off-class escape measured (mix3 root). The isolated remainder is OPEN-DS-MARGINS-NONCENTERED(a)'s non-centered inhabitation/transfer, gated by DS17.4, plus DS16's constrained-value attainment — recorded in the OPEN-DS-STABLE-BASINS rescope.

From Profiled Ds: from a sample to the population · chapter contents

Independently audited. The audit report.

Evidence: py/audit_ds_stable_basins.py. Measured, never theorem authority.