Cubrim-2 · research track

Global Addresser

Cubrim-2 asks a different question than the Cubrim-1 archiver: instead of squeezing bytes locally, can data be transmitted as short references (aiming for a sensible minimum — on the order of tens to a few hundred bytes) into shared, pre-distributed structures — the Valentov Universal Data Matrices? If sender and receiver already hold the same large structure, one can send instructions for selecting and assembling fragments rather than the object itself. This page is the live research log of that track: the hypothesis list and every status below come straight from the research database — nothing here is hardcoded or embellished.

The honest limit, stated first

A fixed short code can distinguish only a finite number of states, while the space of possible files grows exponentially with length — so a short address alone can never uniquely denote every long sequence. An address is meaningful only together with a catalog where the object already exists. And any honest result must charge the full cost: the addresses, the metadata, the residual data — and the shared matrix itself, which is only worth its size when amortized across many files and devices. Cubrim-2 therefore does not promise to “compress any file into 16 bytes”. It maps where global addressing genuinely beats local compression — and records, just as openly, where it structurally cannot.

How much space would ALL possible matrices take

We count in bits. An N-dimensional cube is a visual arrangement of a bit sequence: a 4×4×4 cube is 64 bits laid out in three dimensions. Dimensionality (1D/2D/3D/4D) is a way to arrange the same bits, not a different amount of them. Hence the number of all possible matrices of length B bits is 2^B and depends only on B: a 64-bit 1D string and a 4×4×4 cube share the same 2^64 ≈ 1.8×10^19 states.

B, bits cube example all possible = 2^B store them all (bytes) fits in 20,000×1 TB?
8 2×2×2 2.56×10² 2.56×10² B yes
27 3×3×3 1.34×10⁸ 4.53×10⁸ B yes
51 —(порог/threshold) 2.25×10¹⁵ 1.44×10¹⁶ B yes
64 4×4×4 1.84×10¹⁹ 1.48×10²⁰ B no
125 5×5×5 4.25×10³⁷ 6.65×10³⁸ B no
256 4×4×4×4 (4D) 1.16×10⁷⁷ 3.71×10⁷⁸ B no
1000 10×10×10 1.07×10³⁰¹ 1.34×10³⁰³ B no
4096 8×8×8×8 (4D) 1.04×10¹²³³ 5.35×10¹²³⁵ B no

Capacity yardstick: 20,000 disks of 1 TB = 2×10^16 bytes = 1.6×10^17 bits. The full-enumeration threshold is B = 51 bits: the last length at which all 2^B matrices (with their contents, 2^B×B bits = 1.44×10^16 bytes) still fit; at B = 52 they no longer do (2.93×10^16 bytes). A 4×4×4 cube (64 bits): just the 64-bit addresses of all 2^64 matrices would take 1.48×10^20 bytes ≈ 147.6 EB — four orders of magnitude beyond the yardstick. At B = 256 there are 1.16×10^77 matrices — still slightly fewer than the atoms in the observable universe (~10^80); the “more than atoms” line is crossed at B ≈ 266. Beyond that, super-exponential growth with no physical storage prospect whatsoever.

The honest conclusion: “all possible matrices” cannot be enumerated — 2^B diverges super-exponentially at lengths below a single machine word. So the Addresser stores not all possible blocks but only the ones ACTUALLY ENCOUNTERED (CAS/deduplication): their number is bounded by the volume of real data and obeys the track’s measured laws — 89.9% of blocks in an uncurated matrix occur exactly once (AH-19), and an honest 16–64 bytes per object is achievable only on an exact match against the catalog (AH-05). This is the same fundamental limit as the block above: an address is meaningful only together with a catalog where the object already exists.

On dimensionality: 2^B does not depend on it, but dimensionality changes which bits land in one cube when REAL data is tiled — and therefore how many unique cubes occur in practice. That is measured by a scan (part B of the experiment), not by a formula.

Formulas: number of matrices = 2^B; storing the contents = 2^B × B bits; the ordinal address of one matrix = B bits (2^B states). All numbers are computed with exact integer arithmetic (python), not estimates.

How much space the ACTUALLY encountered matrices need (scan experiment)

A real CROSS-DEVICE corpus of 13.48 GB (a union of three hosts: arcana-devs 9.06 + arcana-www 3.38 + arcana-prod 1.04 GB; the hosts exchanged only cube hashes) was tiled into cubes of B = 4096 bits (512 bytes) in four layouts of the same length: a 1D string of 4096, 2D 64×64, 3D 16×16×16, 4D 8×8×8×8. A layout groups DIFFERENT bits of the file into one cube (strided tiling with a 4096-byte row), so the number of unique cubes on real data differs — even though the number of possible ones (2^4096) is identical.

layout cubes scanned unique % unique cross-host overlap (cubes) store the unique
1D 4096 25 890 520 14 965 607 57.80% 1 847 617 7.14 GiB
2D 64×64 19 368 448 12 077 059 62.35% 1 260 924 5.76 GiB
3D 16×16×16 13 959 168 8 020 728 57.46% 943 354 3.82 GiB
4D 8×8×8×8 10 518 528 5 578 363 53.03% 768 085 2.66 GiB

There is NO saturation: the number of unique cubes grows almost linearly to the very end of the scan (devs-slice curve: 1D 10.9M unique at 7.3 GB → 12.3M at 8.3 GB) — real data at this cube length hardly “runs out”. On the devs slice, 72–82% of unique cubes were seen exactly once — the same measured law as AH-19 (89.9% on CDC chunks): an uncurated matrix is mostly dead weight. Cross-host overlap is real (0.77–1.85M cubes are shared between hosts), and it is what lowers the union corpus unique share to 53–62%.

Disks for the scan itself: 2.7–7.1 GiB of unique matrices per 13.48 GB of cross-device data — a fraction of one 1 TB disk. Extrapolating to the world’s stored data (on the order of 10 ZB = 10^22 bytes; order-of-magnitude per IDC Global DataSphere reports): with the measured 53–62% unique share on the cross-device corpus and NO saturation, the matrices would take ~5.3–6.2 ZB — billions of 1 TB disks, i.e. the same order as the data itself. THE EXTRAPOLATION IS LINEAR AND MARKED AS AN ASSUMPTION: the world corpus differs in composition, and saturation at larger volumes is not excluded — it was simply not observed in the scan.

Conclusions: (1) even storing only the ENCOUNTERED matrices at world scale is the same order as the data itself — the Addresser’s win lives not in a “warehouse of all cubes” but in deduplicating the repeated share (38–47% on the union corpus) and in r≥2 curation (AH-19); (2) the optimal layout by the “fewer unique” criterion is 4D (53.0% unique vs 62.4% for 2D on the union corpus) — multidimensional grouping does gather repeating bits more often, with a moderate margin (~6–9 pp); (3) the comparison is honest with a caveat: layouts need different alignment (2D — 256 KB blocks, 4D — 2 MB), so corpus coverage differs — figures are per each layout’s covered share.

Scripts: probe_matrix_scan.py + matrix_scan_dump.py (strides in the header; the cross-device union exchanges hashes only, MTX-scan-crossdevice-v1); cube hash blake2b-96; saturation curve checkpointed every 500 MB; all figures measured, the extrapolation labeled.

Wave 1 — research complete

Wave-1 deep research is complete: each of the 24 hypotheses carries a real measured verdict (full-cost charged accounting, falsification test executed, script+SHA on the card). GO means the mechanism works and is measured; NO-GO means it is closed by measurement or strict arithmetic. Predicted levers remain predictions and are labeled; the measured numbers live in every card below.

NO-GO · 9 GO · 15
shared context (dictionary / fragments) · 4 identity dedup — reference ≪ payload on exact match · 3 structurally cannot win (boundary) · 4 infrastructure cost accounting · 10 near-match + delta · 3

Generated: 2026-08-28T23:41:35Z · db:addressor_hypotheses

Hypotheses · 24

Page 5 / 12

AH-09 GO W1 · 2026-07-13

MPH catalog

If the matrix index is built on minimal perfect hashing (~2-3 bits/key) plus a short fingerprint (8-16 bits) with cryptographic confirmation on hit, then catalog bytes per chunk become small enough for a billion-chunk store to fit in a few GiB, because MPH is near-optimal in memory.

Data class (Z)
catalog infrastructure (meta)
Address target
n/a
Predicted lever
a 10^9-chunk catalog in a few GiB (prediction)
Ceiling category
infrastructure cost accounting
Mechanism
near-optimal MPH memory + a cheap fingerprint prefilter
Falsification test
fp/bytes curve; if a safe fp-rate is unreachable with a 16-bit fingerprint and the catalog eats the amortization -> configuration NO-GO
Full cost (total_cost)
infra line item: catalog_bytes/chunk ~ 2-3 bits MPH + 8-16 bit fingerprint; on hit — confirmation by full hash (network) · amortized: divided across all fleet accesses.
Probe verdict
GO — the compactness claim is confirmed with a REAL serialized structure (no MPH even needed): 2.0 B/key at a 16-bit fingerprint, measured fp 3.96% (matching theory 2664/65536=4.06% — the structure is honest), every positive confirmed by full hash over the network. Extrapolating the measured density to 10^9 keys = 1.86 GiB (labeled arithmetic on measured data). Sensitivity: fp8 is useless (fp~100%), fp12 intermediate (47.8%), fp16 is the operating point. The falsification condition (catalog eats the amortization) did not fire: 2 B/key << the 34.3 B/key wave-1 model.
Measured result (raw research log; descriptors partly in the RU original)
date
2026-07-15
probe
DR-catalog-bloom-v1
verdict
GO

structure

реальный bucketed sorted-fingerprint индекс (packfile-idx стиль) над 681 973 реальными чанк-хэшами devs∪prod

verdict_note

GO — the compactness claim is confirmed with a REAL serialized structure (no MPH even needed): 2.0 B/key at a 16-bit fingerprint, measured fp 3.96% (matching theory 2664/65536=4.06% — the structure is honest), every positive confirmed by full hash over the network. Extrapolating the measured density to 10^9 keys = 1.86 GiB (labeled arithmetic on measured data). Sensitivity: fp8 is useless (fp~100%), fp12 intermediate (47.8%), fp16 is the operating point. The falsification condition (catalog eats the amortization) did not fire: 2 B/key << the 34.3 B/key wave-1 model.

sensitivity_fp_bits

bytes_per_keymeasured_fp_pct
fp8199.997%
fp12247.809%
fp1623.962%
extrapolated_1e9_keys_GiB_at_fp16
1.86
AH-10 GO W1 · 2026-07-13

Sender-side Bloom prefilter

If the sender keeps a local Bloom filter of the catalog (fp ~1%), then network lookups on a typical user mix fall to roughly hit_rate x (1+fp) of chunks, because known-new chunks are rejected locally without a round trip.

Data class (Z)
typical user mix
Address target
n/a
Predicted lever
orders of magnitude fewer network lookups (prediction)
Ceiling category
infrastructure cost accounting
Mechanism
local rejection of misses
Falsification test
matrix churn model vs filter-update traffic; updates costlier than the saved lookups -> NO-GO
Full cost (total_cost)
infra line item: client filter ~1-2 bytes per catalog chunk + UPDATE TRAFFIC under matrix churn · savings: lookup round-trips.
Probe verdict
GO — a real filter against a real device stream: 70.16% of network lookups cut (151,189 -> 45,116; 44,828 true hits, 288 false passes), measured fp 0.298% at the 1% target. The falsification condition (filter updates costlier than the savings) was executed with the MEASURED drift (1.3%/month): churn traffic is 0.11% of one full scan's savings — it did not fire, by ~3 orders of magnitude. A 1 MiB filter for the fleet catalog is negligible in total_cost.
Measured result (raw research log; descriptors partly in the RU original)
date
2026-07-15
probe
DR-catalog-bloom-v1
verdict
GO

structure

реальный Bloom-фильтр над 681 973 ключами; реальный поток устройства arcana-www (151 189 уникальных чанков)

sensitivity

bits_per_keyfilter_bytesmeasured_fp_pctlookup_reduction_pctchurn_over_savings_pct
target_1pct101.00 MiB (1 048 576 B)0.298%70.16%0.11%
target_0.1pct152.00 MiB (2 097 152 B)0%70.35%0.16%
churn_source
ИЗМЕРЕННЫЙ дрейф KB 1.3%/мес (AH-12)

verdict_note

GO — a real filter against a real device stream: 70.16% of network lookups cut (151,189 -> 45,116; 44,828 true hits, 288 false passes), measured fp 0.298% at the 1% target. The falsification condition (filter updates costlier than the savings) was executed with the MEASURED drift (1.3%/month): churn traffic is 0.11% of one full scan's savings — it did not fire, by ~3 orders of magnitude. A 1 MiB filter for the fleet catalog is negligible in total_cost.

Page 5 / 12

Where the Addresser cannot beat local compression

Six boundaries are fixed by wave 1 as explicit anti-hypotheses and no-win zones: unique high-entropy data (personal media, encrypted streams — nothing repeats globally); tiny unique files below the inversion point (fixed catalog costs exceed any saving); mathematically generated matrices (an address into an exhaustive or random pool costs at least as much as the content itself); a byte histogram or hash used as the data carrier (order is lost and buying it back costs the file’s entropy); long-tail content fetched roughly once (the first transfer is never repaid); and fragment schemes whose gain collapses into what a shared dictionary already provides. A tiny fixed-size reference per object (tens of bytes) is honestly achievable only on an exact match against a catalog that already stores the object; everywhere else the win criterion is simply that the reference plus all charged costs stay well below the payload it replaces — the reference size is a metric to minimize, not a hard gate.