This version reports a preregistered cross-platform calibration of a proposed Bell-functional drift signature on six official NIST loophole-free photonic runs. Under the frozen primary analysis, one run-level slope was positive and five were negative; the median slope was -2.5571 × 10^-6 and the exact one-sided positive-direction Wilcoxon p-value was 0.96875. The preregistered result is therefore fail. The result rejects the narrow prediction that the proposed positive A-coordinate drift transports across platforms under the specified mapping. It does not test the original Bell violation, refute quantum mechanics, establish a universal negative drift, or support a gravity, extra-dimensional, signaling, consciousness-based, or cosmological mechanism. The archive provides the English report, frozen preregistration chain, analysis code and tests, derived block tables, run-level and aggregate results, figures, provenance records, and release checksums. Raw NIST HDF5 objects are not redistributed; official source locations and local integrity identifiers are documented.
This version reports a preregistered cross-platform calibration of a proposed Bell-functional drift signature on six official NIST loophole-free photonic runs. Under the frozen primary analysis, one run-level slope was positive and five were negative; the median slope was -2.5571 × 10^-6 and the exact one-sided positive-direction Wilcoxon p-value was 0.96875. The preregistered result is therefore fail. The result rejects the narrow prediction that the proposed positive A-coordinate drift transports across platforms under the specified mapping. It does not test the original Bell violation, refute quantum mechanics, establish a universal negative drift, or support a gravity, extra-dimensional, signaling, consciousness-based, or cosmological mechanism. The archive provides the English report, frozen preregistration chain, analysis code and tests, derived block tables, run-level and aggregate results, figures, provenance records, and release checksums. Raw NIST HDF5 objects are not redistributed; official source locations and local integrity identifiers are documented.
The reported violations of Bell inequalities are routinely read as an experimental refutation of local realism. This preprint asks how firmly the record supports that reading. We catalogue the classical routes by which a strictly local apparatus can report |S| > 2 - from outcome-dependent loss and coincidence-window selection (demonstrated in hardware) to synchronisation, electronics-level click shifts and analysis-parameter selection - and show that below the Eberhard efficiency the exact quantum correlation curve certifies nothing, being reproduced exactly by a known local detection model. We then define the first family-level synchronisation audit (plateau membership, bias index, sub-bound fraction), validate it on synthetic data with known ground truth, and execute it under preregistered protocols on three public archives. The raw Innsbruck record passes: across the full longdist series, every standard-configuration violation is a property of the raw data, not of the calibration. On the Delft event-ready data, a 50,000-member heralding-acceptance family answers the standing postselection critique: the violation is generic, not an acceptance choice. On the NIST 2015 record, an outsider reconstruction of the certified pipeline recovers the Bell geometry and gate optima but stalls at undisclosed cleaning parameters - a documented limit of third-party reproducibility. The programme distils into seven cleanliness criteria (C1–C7) for any dataset and eight provenance requirements (M1–M8) for future experiments. All figures and numbers are reproducible from the supplementary scripts (deterministic, fixed seeds, minutes on a laptop); raw data are fetched from the official public archives.
Public photon Bell-test records retain timing structure that is lost in aggregate statistics. This paper tests whether that structure survives quantitative response controls in three experimental archives. In the Weihs data, a rectangular contrast of four channel-pair timing centroids tests whether accepted signal delays can be written as a sum of local channel contributions. For longdist1, the contrast is 1.405 ns and 1.515 ns in disjoint chronological halves, with pointwise 95% block intervals [1.018, 1.791] ns and [1.193, 1.836] ns. Both survive the enumerated centroid scan under the specified 20-block inference at an 8-ns coincidence half-width and remain positive under clock, background, and gate checks. A flexible empirical timing model, however, transfers between chronological halves after clock-drift calibration. In the Christensen archive, the suppressed setting-pair channel is strongly enriched in coincidence tails, but a cross-fitted signal–accidental model predicts 714.6 of 730 counts beyond 300 ns; the residual is 15.4 counts with interval [−54.6, 85.3]. NIST timing-offset records exhibit a terminal-mask excess accompanied by an Alice-side singles-rate change and compatible with a separately calibrated local-setting mixture. The evidence separates reproducible structure, failure of an additive accepted-centroid model, and effects accommodated by explicit response controls. Finite coincidence selection and known switching-related populations prevent the centroid contrast alone from establishing intrinsic polarization–time coupling or a failure of quantum theory. Statistical scope. The analyses are exploratory. Coarser clustering weakens scan-adjusted significance: with ten blocks per half, the highlighted Weihs contrast has adjusted approximate p values of 0.087 and 0.014. The residual is specific to the accepted-centroid model and does not establish a discrepancy beyond all independently calibrated temporal-response models. Files and reproducibility. Bell_manuscript.pdf is the self-contained, 13-page preprint dated 30 October 2026. Bell_Reanalysis_Source.zip contains the editable LaTeX manuscript, numerical figure code, reconstruction and analysis scripts, derived records, source manifests and hashes, full comparison tables, calibration and sensitivity results, and reproduction instructions. The NIST analysis uses 60 prescribed samples of 500,000 trials, rather than complete runs. The full upstream Christensen archive and Weihs time-tag files are retrieved by the supplied fetchers and are not bundled. A clean internal rerun reproduced the checked numerical outputs exactly; external independent reproduction is not claimed. Publication status and assistance. This research preprint has not been peer reviewed. AI tools assisted programming, analysis, and manuscript preparation; responsibility for the work remains with the author. License scope. The manuscript and original figures are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. Original analysis code is licensed under MIT. Third-party source data and derived excerpts retain applicable source terms and attribution; this deposit does not relicense upstream material.
This preregistration describes a confirmatory study of an upstream conditioning architecture in a quantum error-correction workflow. The project’s purpose is to test whether an intervention applied prior to the primary decoder produces a real and reproducible decoder-relevant effect, remains compatible with more than one downstream decoder family, generates a measurable exposed-observable statistical footprint, and improves or preserves performance across a preregistered regime rather than only at a single operating point. The study is intentionally limited to architecture-level evaluation, with the public claim set confined to exposed observables, frozen transformations, preregistered statistical tests, explicit negative controls, and bounded interpretation rules. The confirmatory design is organized around five preregistered tests: category existence, decoder compatibility, structural footprint, observable statistical signature, and regime robustness. Across these tests, the central comparison is between a baseline control pipeline and a conditioned pipeline in which the upstream intervention is applied while all non-conditioning settings are held fixed. The study uses frozen observables and frozen execution rules, including matched seeds, shot counts, code distances, physical error rates, geometry, and baseline decoder settings, so that any supported effect can be interpreted as evidence about the architecture under test rather than as a byproduct of post hoc tuning. To preserve a clean-room boundary, the registration restricts primary analysis to exposed, decoder-facing quantities only. These include logical failure, an exposed defect-count summary, and an exposed decoder-difficulty proxy, along with a locked scalar error-load construction derived from control-only standardization. The study does not rely on decoder-internal state variables, hidden confidence traces, or implementation-specific internal diagnostics in its primary confirmatory analyses. This structure is intended to let readers evaluate whether the architecture leaves a reproducible footprint in decoder-facing behavior without disclosing reconstruction-level mechanism details. Expected outcomes are defined in confirmatory rather than speculative terms. If the preregistered hypotheses are supported, the study is expected to provide evidence that an upstream conditioning intervention exists as a real architectural category in QEC, acts before the primary decoder, is compatible with downstream decoding, changes decoder-relevant exposed structure, and produces a reproducible observable statistical footprint in logical-failure behavior. If support is absent, mixed, or null, those outcomes will still be recorded under the frozen rules without rescue through post hoc metric changes, reweighting, or reinterpretation. In either case, the expected result of the registration is a bounded, auditable public record of whether this architecture class shows reproducible category-level behavior under a preregistered confirmatory design. The preregistration is not intended to establish a unique mechanism identity, identify a privileged implementation, disclose implementation-specific reconstruction details, or support claims about exact targeting logic, suppression laws, subset-sizing logic, telemetry-governed control, or broader cross-domain theory narratives. Public-facing interpretation is therefore intentionally limited to category validation and exposed-observable behavior. This is meant to support rigorous public evaluation while preserving strict clean-room limits around protected implementation detail.
We present an eliminative analysis of no-signaling equalities in the NIST loophole-free Bell test (Shalm et al., 2015).Standard analyses examine outcome correlations to compute CHSH S values. We instead examine whether one party'sdetection rate depends on the other party's setting choice. Under quantum mechanics, these marginal probabilities must beindependent of the remote setting. Using a six-gate streaming pipeline on 356 million event-level trials, we apply theexperiment's own timing calibration (phase filter: pk=90, radius=4) to select genuine entangled photon detections inPockels cell slots 5-7. In the phase-filtered data, Alice's marginal detection rate for setting a=2 shows a stationary deviation:z = 2.41, permutation p = 0.017, 95% bootstrap CI [1.44e-6, 1.31e-5] excluding zero. The combined chi-squared is 9.40 (4df), one tick below the p < 0.05 threshold of 9.49. The deviation is temporally stationary across 100 time windows spanningthe full experimental run, with near-zero autocorrelation and near-zero linear trend. Without phase filtering, all trialsproduce a null result (p = 0.40), consistent with noise dilution from background detector clicks. A second NIST run using adifferent random number generator (ClassicalRNG XOR) lacks detection-level data and cannot be phase-filtered,precluding direct replication with matching detection definitions.
Six frozen interference predictions, independent calibration and a count-preserving memory test g∗=(1,c∗,2c∗2−1,c∗2,1,c∗2),c∗=cos8π. Can a retained reference recover interference that two fresh references cannot? This prospective protocol freezes the signed coherence for six histories: null, single, shared forward, fresh forward, shared echo and fresh echo. The forward and echo memory contrasts are respectively minus and plus sin2(π/8)=0.1464466094…. The paper derives the complete reference-partition map, specifies 24 history/phase settings, preserves every raw attempt including loss, and separates source coefficients from independent apparatus calibration. It fixes a disjoint training sample, 2.4 million validation attempts, simultaneous finite-sample rejection and equivalence criteria, and held-out scores against explicitly declared comparators. A second, independently timestamped laboratory capsule is required before validation data are acquired. What the test establishes. A qualified joint pass validates this QTT optical construction and its reference-memory pattern in the specified apparatus. The matched controlled-unitary quantum-mechanical model predicts the same pattern with the same calibration and no additional fitted parameters. Therefore this benchmark does not distinguish QTT from matched QM or independently establish an absolute clock. Any predictive advantage over a fitted memory-free reduction or history-specific harmonic fit is reported separately. Design-stage preregistration. The deposit includes the full paper, frozen machine-readable predictions, analysis code, independent algebra and mutation checks, synthetic operating checks, and exact reconstruction checksums. No new laboratory result is reported. The earlier 95.76% injected-template retention motivates count-preserving processing; it is neither a natural-signal detection nor an experimental correction factor. QTT source dependency: Balanced-Rail Optical Intertwining Theorem. The necessary mathematics is reproduced here. Related physical reference qualification: Physical-Terminal Reference Framework. The current PDF is the default preview; the ZIP contains the complete reconstruction package.
We report the confirmatory stage of a finite, preregistered test of phase-resolved response ina two-channel quantum 6j recoupling model. The upstream construction fixes a regular localq-deformation coordinate, an explicit finite carrier atlas, and analytic recoupling observables.A disjoint calibration stage selected the integer q-curvature mode m = 5 against a matchednoninteger control frequency 9.5. Before any confirmatory family was evaluated, the protocolfroze eight previously unused external-label families, all 106 ordered carriers belonging tothem, a 1101-point deformation grid, a cubic baseline projection, an anchored complex-columnprimary observable, a signed-angular-speed replication observable, exact decision thresholds,and a one-run stop rule.The primary endpoint was positive in all eight families. The median family energy advantage was 0.12716387712459315, compared with the preregistered threshold 0.02; the exact onesided family sign-test value was 1/256 = 0.00390625. The primary family phases were stronglyconcentrated, with R1 = 0.9967284980027259 and R2 = 0.9869553189520441. The frozendecision rule therefore assigned the protocol outcome A_UNIVERSAL_PHASE_LOCK. The replication observable also gave eight positive families, median advantage 0.09240553845217536,and R1 = R2 = 1. It did not participate in outcome assignment. Numerical audits found nohard failure, nonfinite value, residual degeneracy, undefined phase, or anchor-sign failure; thelargest reported orthogonality and evaluator discrepancies were of order 10−15.The controlled conclusion is deliberately narrow: on the frozen finite atlas, at the frozenmode/control pair and under the declared observation protocol, the primary residual phasesexhibit preregistered directional concentration together with positive predictor-over-controlenergy advantage. The result is local in the deformation coordinate and finite in labels. It isnot a theorem for all SU(2)k data, not a pentagon, braiding, or modular-coherence statement,not global gluing, not a large-label or continuum limit, and not evidence of physical timeoscillations, dynamics, mass, matter, or gravity.