run 033Settled
../lab/runs/033-host-primes-cogrowth.mdPredictionκ ∈ [0.45, 0.85] — the per-step decay of the return probability slows by 15–55% between the two windows, as a stretched exponential exp(−c·m^β) with β between 0.25 and 0.7 does; the deficit from free density is sub-exponential at this scale
Falsifierκ ≥ 0.97 — constant decay rate, i.e. exponential decay of the return probability: at this scale the relator count behaves like a non-amenable group's, and amenability is invisible below length 48
VerdictCONFIRMED — κ = 0.665. The per-step decay of ln p over successive windows of eight is 0.119, 0.077, 0.064, 0.057, 0.051 (m = 8→16 through 40→48): the return probability's decay keeps slowing, the relator density is closing on the free density 3ᵐ sub-exponentially, and at m = 48 the local exponent log₃R(m)/m is 0.884. Ball of radius 24: 132,748 elements; R(48) = 1.74×10²⁰ of 4·3⁴⁷ words. Controls, unscored: the affine Coxeter group Ã₃ (amenable, polynomial growth) decays 0.122, 0.070, 0.051, 0.040, 0.033, κ = 0.47; the non-affine Coxeter control (growth rate 1.93, contains F₂) reaches only radius 18 and decays 0.181, 0.157, 0.140 over m = 8→32, κ on the matched windows [8,16 | 24,32] = 0.77 against the Grigorchuk group's 0.54 and Ã₃'s 0.42 — the ordering non-amenable > intermediate > polynomial that Kesten–Grigorchuk predicts, though the non-amenable control's rate has not yet flattened at these lengths, which is why it was not the seal.
Sealed before the count was run (2026-09-27, codifier). Below 0.45 is unanticipated.
Why this is the push on the graph prime number theorem. In a (q+1)-regular graph the primitive backtrackless cycles of length m number ~ qᵐ/m — N/log N once more — with the error term set by the Ihara poles, i.e. by whether the graph's Riemann hypothesis holds. For the infinite Cayley graph of a group the primes are the relators, and their count per vertex is R(m) up to the tail correction. Kesten (spectral radius 1 iff amenable) with Grigorchuk's cogrowth theorem (cogrowth rate maximal iff amenable) says: the graph PNT holds at full density qᵐ upstairs iff the group is amenable — and those are exactly the groups whose finite quotients fail the graph RH. Expanders are the mirror: the universal cover is a tree with no primes at all, and the quotients can be Ramanujan. Primes dense upstairs, zeros off the line downstairs; primes absent upstairs, zeros on the line. This run measures the "error term" on the intermediate-growth host, where the density is full but approached sub-exponentially.
Controls, reported not scored. Two Coxeter groups on four involutions in the integral Tits representation, same reduced-word normalisation: Ã₃ (4-cycle, m = 3 on neighbours, 2 on opposites; virtually ℤ³, amenable, polynomial growth — expect κ ≈ 0.6 from p ~ m^{−3/2}) and the same graph with one opposite pair set to m = 3 (non-affine, contains F₂, non-amenable — expect κ closer to 1, but a polynomial prefactor keeps it below 1 at this scale, which is why the control is not the seal).
Also reported. The tailless counts C(m) (cyclically reduced relators — the Ihara primes proper), the local exponent γ(m) = log₃ R(m) / m, and the shortest relators found by length.
---
| m | 8 | 16 | 24 | 32 | 40 | 48 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grigorchuk R(m) | 272 | 6.9×10⁵ | 2.44×10⁹ | 9.57×10¹² | 3.99×10¹⁶ | 1.74×10²⁰ |
| Grigorchuk p(m) | 0.031 | 0.012 | 0.0065 | 0.0039 | 0.0025 | 0.0016 |
| Grigorchuk γ(m) = log₃R/m | 0.638 | 0.765 | 0.820 | 0.850 | 0.870 | 0.884 |
| Ã₃ p(m) | 0.016 | 0.0060 | 0.0034 | 0.0023 | 0.0017 | 0.0013 |
| Ã₃ γ(m) | 0.562 | 0.726 | 0.796 | 0.835 | 0.861 | 0.879 |
| non-affine H p(m) | 0.0075 | 0.0018 | 0.00051 | 0.00017 | — | — |
| non-affine H γ(m) | 0.477 | 0.656 | 0.723 | 0.761 | — | — |
Per-step decay of ln p over the windows 8→16, 16→24, 24→32, 32→40, 40→48: Grigorchuk 0.119, 0.077, 0.064, 0.057, 0.051; Ã₃ 0.122, 0.070, 0.051, 0.040, 0.033; H 0.181, 0.157, 0.140 (to 32). κ = 0.665 for the Grigorchuk group (band [0.45, 0.85]); 0.47 for Ã₃; 0.77 for H on the shorter matched windows, where the Grigorchuk value is 0.54.
Shortest relators: Grigorchuk R(3..8) = 6, 6, 12, 36, 78, 272 (bcd and its rotations at length 3; the group has odd relators); Ã₃ has relators at even lengths only, R(4) = 4 (the two commuting pairs), R(6) = 16; H has R(4) = 2 (one commuting pair), R(6) = 14.
Reading. At every accessible length the three groups have relator-density exponents within 0.1 of each other (0.77–0.88): the level does not separate amenable from not, as the seal's prose said it would not. The trend does: the two amenable groups' decay rates fall steadily toward zero — the polynomial one faster than the intermediate one, as p ~ m^{−3/2} against exp(−c m^β) requires — while the non-amenable control's rate is two to three times larger at the same lengths and, by Kesten, must level off at −ln ρ > 0. So the host's primes obey the graph prime number theorem at full density with a sub-exponential error term, which is the amenable signature, and the same amenability is why the quotients' Ihara zeta fails its Riemann hypothesis (run 030 correction, N-026 correction 3: the gap is a path's). That is the pushed analogy, measured on one side.
What would sharpen it. Fit β: log(−d ln p/dm) against log m over m ∈ [16, 48] gives the stretched exponent directly (the five windows give slope −0.5 to −0.65, i.e. β ≈ 0.35–0.5, from a coarse fit — not sealed; for Ã₃ the same fit gives the 1.5/m of a ℤ³ walk exactly: 0.034 predicted, 0.033 measured at m = 44). And the finite quotients' side: the Ihara zeta of Cay(G/St(4)) from its adjacency spectrum, its non-trivial poles against the Ramanujan circle, against the relator count R(m) for m below the systole 16, where the quotient's primes are the group's own.
generated 2026-10-25the lab index