pith. sign in
theorem

interactionDefect_RCLCombiner

proved
show as:

Why this theorem is linked from SOCKET: SOft Collision Kernel EsTimator for Sparse Attention unclear

Pith linked this Lean declaration because the review connected a specific passage in the paper to this theorem. The relation tag says how strong that connection is; it is not a generic placeholder.

Lemma 5: Var(X) ≤ μ(1−μ) with equality iff X ∈ {0,1}

Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

module
IndisputableMonolith.Foundation.BranchSelection
domain
Foundation
line
122 · github
papers citing
5 papers (below)

plain-language theorem explainer

The interaction defect of the RCL combiner with parameter c equals c u v at every pair. Branch selection arguments cite the identity to convert the RCL parameter into a coupling witness. The proof is a direct algebraic reduction that substitutes the two definitions and simplifies.

Claim. Let $P(u,v)=2u+2v+cuv$. The interaction defect satisfies $P(u,v)-P(u,0)-P(0,v)+P(0,0)=cuv$.

background

The module formalizes the Recognition Composition Law family $F(xy)+F(x/y)=2F(x)+2F(y)+c F(x)F(y)$ whose associated combiner is the polynomial $P(u,v)=2u+2v+cuv$. The interaction defect of any combiner $P$ is the bilinear form $P(u,v)-P(u,0)-P(0,v)+P(0,0)$, which vanishes if and only if $P$ is separately additive. RCLCombiner attaches the real parameter $c$ to this polynomial.

proof idea

One-line wrapper that unfolds interactionDefect and RCLCombiner then applies the ring tactic.

why it matters

The identity is invoked by RCLCombiner_isCoupling_iff and RCLCombiner_nonzero_couples. It supplies the explicit coupling witness required by the strengthened (L4*) composition consistency in RS_Branch_Selection.tex, thereby excluding the additive branch and isolating the bilinear representative J (T5).

Switch to Lean above to see the machine-checked source, dependencies, and usage graph.