mirror of
https://github.com/logos-blockchain/research.git
synced 2026-08-08 20:23:28 +00:00
99ce8b76d0
My sec 6.12 claim was "costs no honest recovery at any tested delay". That measurement held max_uncles = 4 -- a slack cap, which hides the window entirely, since with four uncle slots the queue drains faster than the window can bind. Re-running the sec 3.4 absorption sweep at U = 1, where the window IS the binding constraint, shows the cost is real: delta=4 knee W 5 -> 6 at W=10: 0.9982 -> 0.9981 (free) delta=8 knee W 6 -> 8 at W=10: 0.9963 -> 0.9930 (-0.0033) delta=16 knee W 20 -> 20 at W=10: 0.9658 -> 0.9326 (-0.0332) The floor rises by one to two block-intervals, exactly what a parent gap running one block-interval longer than the uncle gap predicts -- the prediction I wrote into the plan and then failed to test, because the first study was configured with a cap that masked it. Both statements are true and the report now carries both: at the recommended U = ceil(rho)+1 the anchor is free, and at U = 1 it costs measurably from delta = 8 up. The consequence for sizing is that W should be measured against the parent gap under the new rule -- W = 12 restores the margin W = 10 has today, inside the spec's floor(0.6k) bound, so it needs no further spec change. The delta = 16 row is U-limited rather than window-limited (rho ~ 0.87 against U = 1, below the recommended cap), and is labelled as such. The sec 8.5 spec-delta row and the sec 6 arc bullet carried the same overclaim and are corrected too. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>