Skip to content

[WIP] Investigate predictive power of phase gradient measurement#2932

Closed
fermga with Copilot wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
copilot/research-phase-gradient-validation-again
Closed

[WIP] Investigate predictive power of phase gradient measurement#2932
fermga with Copilot wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
copilot/research-phase-gradient-validation-again

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Nov 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for assigning this issue to me. I'm starting to work on it and will keep this PR's description up to date as I form a plan and make progress.

Original prompt

This section details on the original issue you should resolve

<issue_title>Research: Phase Gradient |∇φ| Predictive Power Validation</issue_title>
<issue_description># Phase Gradient |∇φ| Predictive Power Validation

Context

The telemetry module (src/tnfr/physics/fields.py) provides phase gradient measurement |∇φ| as a research-phase metric. Current evidence shows weak correlation with coherence (corr ≈ -0.13), qualifying it as "EM-like, long-range" interaction regime.

Current Status: RESEARCH (NON-CANONICAL)

From §10-11 evidence:

  • Correlation: |∇φ| vs ΔC ≈ -0.13 (weak)
  • Range: Long (network-wide effects)
  • Mechanism: Directional phase tension

Objective

Investigate whether phase gradient |∇φ| can achieve predictive power comparable to Φ_s (|corr| > 0.5) and establish unique safety criteria not captured by structural potential alone.

Research Tasks

1. Extended Correlation Analysis

Goal: Test if |∇φ| correlation improves under specific conditions

Experiments:

  • Test correlation at different intensity ranges (I ∈ [1.5, 2.5])
  • Separate analysis by topology (ring, scale_free, ws, tree, grid)
  • Track time-resolved evolution: |∇φ|(t) vs C(t) trajectories
  • Test RA-dominated sequences (resonance amplification) vs OZ-heavy

Hypothesis: |∇φ| may show stronger correlation in:

  • Resonance propagation scenarios (RA/UM operators)
  • Long-range topologies (ring, grid)
  • Pre-fragmentation windows (high stress before collapse)

Acceptance Criteria:

  • Document corr(|∇φ|, ΔC) across conditions
  • Identify regime where |corr| > 0.3 (if any)
  • Compare with Φ_s baseline (corr = -0.822)

2. Path-Integrated Gradient Analysis

Goal: Test if cumulative phase gradient predicts coupling effectiveness

Theory: From §3, UM/RA effectiveness should correlate with path-integrated |∇φ| along coupling edges.

Implementation:

def path_integrated_gradient(G, path):
    """Sum |∇φ| along shortest path between nodes."""
    total = 0
    for i, j in zip(path[:-1], path[1:]):
        phi_i = G.nodes[i]['phase']
        phi_j = G.nodes[j]['phase']
        total += abs(wrap_angle(phi_j - phi_i))
    return total

Experiments:

  • Measure path gradient before/after UM/RA application
  • Correlate with coupling strength (effective information transfer)
  • Compare with coherence length ξ_C predictions

Acceptance Criteria:

  • Establish if high path gradient impedes or facilitates coupling
  • Document threshold values for effective RA propagation

3. Unique Safety Criterion Development

Goal: Identify if |∇φ| provides safety information not captured by Φ_s

Current Gap:

  • Φ_s predicts global stability (Δ Φ_s < 2.0 escape threshold)
  • |∇φ| may capture local directional stress before global collapse

Tests:

  • Track |∇φ|_max evolution in fragmentation events
  • Test if |∇φ| spike precedes Φ_s escape (early warning)
  • Measure |∇φ| variance distribution (hotspot detection)

Proposed Criteria:

Safety_gradient = max(|∇φ|) < threshold_gradient

Experiments: Calibrate threshold_gradient via:

  • False positive rate (stable systems flagged)
  • False negative rate (fragmentation missed)
  • Lead time (steps before Φ_s escape)

Acceptance Criteria:

  • threshold_gradient value with <5% false positive rate
  • Lead time ≥ 2 steps before fragmentation
  • Demonstrate cases where |∇φ| alerts but Φ_s doesn't (or vice versa)

4. Cross-Domain Validation

Goal: Test |∇φ| predictions in biological/social/AI applications (domain neutrality)

Proposed Domains:

  • Biological: Neural synchronization patterns (phase coherence in oscillator networks)
  • Social: Opinion dynamics (phase = position on issue spectrum)
  • AI: Distributed learning (phase = gradient alignment)

Implementation:

  • Adapt |∇φ| computation to domain-specific phase definitions
  • Run simulations with domain-appropriate topologies
  • Compare |∇φ| predictive power across domains

Acceptance Criteria:

  • |∇φ| correlation consistent across ≥2 domains (CV < 20%)
  • Domain-specific interpretation documented
  • Evidence of universal mechanism

Promotion Criteria to Canonical

From fields.py documentation:

  1. Predictive Power: |corr| > 0.5 comparable to Φ_s (currently ~0.13)
  2. Unique Safety Criteria: Not redundant with Φ_s < 2.0 threshold
  3. Cross-Domain Validation: Biological, social, AI applications

Constraints

Preserve Invariants:

Classification: RESEARCH until promotion criteria satisfied

Tools & References

Existing Tools:

  • `src/tnfr/physics...

Custom agent used: TNFR
TNFR Agent


💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.

@netlify

netlify Bot commented Nov 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Preview for stunning-zabaione-f1f1ef failed. Why did it fail? →

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 88ee197
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/stunning-zabaione-f1f1ef/deploys/6912e1f34fd2fc0008144557

@fermga fermga closed this Nov 11, 2025
Copilot AI requested a review from fermga November 11, 2025 07:15
@fermga
fermga deleted the copilot/research-phase-gradient-validation-again branch June 13, 2026 09:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Research: Phase Gradient |∇φ| Predictive Power Validation

2 participants