This document fixes, before the data exist, the hypothesis, apparatus, observables, cadence, analysis, thresholds, controls, stopping rule and reporting commitment of a one-year search for a modulation of superconducting-qubit energy relaxation (T1) at the sidereal frequency, 1/(23 h 56 m 4.09 s), beyond what the solar day and its seasonal modulation can produce. Data collection began on 17 October 2026 at 16:42 UTC on qubit 9 of the IBM Heron processor ibm_fez: an eight-delay inversion-recovery T1 measurement every six hours (about 3 s of processor time each), with the device's calibration values polled hourly. The analysis is fixed in advance: a least-squares fit of a smooth drift plus sinusoids at the solar, sidereal, anti-sidereal and extended-sidereal frequencies, with the reported amplitude leakage-corrected as sqrt(A_sid^2 - A_anti^2) (Farley and Storey 1954). The pipeline was validated on synthetic data before the first measurement and recovers an injected 0.3% at 2.7-3.4 sigma while returning 0.5 sigma with nothing injected. Detection requires a leakage-corrected amplitude at or above 3 sigma, both control channels below 2 sigma, a phase stable between the two halves of the year, and survival when runs adjacent to calibrations are removed; otherwise the result is the 95% upper limit, expected near 0.3%. The search is declared inconclusive if fewer than 900 of 1460 scheduled runs succeed or the anti-sidereal control exceeds 3 sigma. An amplitude matching the known cosmic-ray anisotropy (~0.1%) is a calibration, not a discovery. Stopping rule: one year, with a six-month interim look at the controls only; a second year is pre-declared as the response to an inconclusive or 2-3 sigma outcome. The result will be reported whether it is a detection, a bound, or a failure of the apparatus. Standard physics predicts a null result at this sensitivity; the alternative hypothesis is from The Cosmic Page (doi:10.5281/zenodo.23287018, Ch. 13) and the research proposal doi:10.5281/zenodo.23201109. Included: the pre-registration (PDF and LaTeX source), the monitor script that runs on the device, the fixed analysis script, the synthetic-data validation script with its results and figure, and the README. First data point: job db9qap9gv2cc73e5tufg, 2026-10-17T16:42:19Z, T1 = 162.9 +/- 7.9 us.
This document fixes, before the data exist, the hypothesis, apparatus, observables, cadence, analysis, thresholds, controls, stopping rule and reporting commitment of a one-year search for a modulation of superconducting-qubit energy relaxation (T1) at the sidereal frequency, 1/(23 h 56 m 4.09 s), beyond what the solar day and its seasonal modulation can produce. Data collection began on 17 October 2026 at 16:42 UTC on qubit 9 of the IBM Heron processor ibm_fez: an eight-delay inversion-recovery T1 measurement every six hours (about 3 s of processor time each), with the device's calibration values polled hourly. The analysis is fixed in advance: a least-squares fit of a smooth drift plus sinusoids at the solar, sidereal, anti-sidereal and extended-sidereal frequencies, with the reported amplitude leakage-corrected as sqrt(A_sid^2 - A_anti^2) (Farley and Storey 1954). The pipeline was validated on synthetic data before the first measurement and recovers an injected 0.3% at 2.7-3.4 sigma while returning 0.5 sigma with nothing injected. Detection requires a leakage-corrected amplitude at or above 3 sigma, both control channels below 2 sigma, a phase stable between the two halves of the year, and survival when runs adjacent to calibrations are removed; otherwise the result is the 95% upper limit, expected near 0.3%. The search is declared inconclusive if fewer than 900 of 1460 scheduled runs succeed or the anti-sidereal control exceeds 3 sigma. An amplitude matching the known cosmic-ray anisotropy (~0.1%) is a calibration, not a discovery. Stopping rule: one year, with a six-month interim look at the controls only; a second year is pre-declared as the response to an inconclusive or 2-3 sigma outcome. The result will be reported whether it is a detection, a bound, or a failure of the apparatus. Standard physics predicts a null result at this sensitivity; the alternative hypothesis is from The Cosmic Page (doi:10.5281/zenodo.23287018, Ch. 13) and the research proposal doi:10.5281/zenodo.23201109. Included: the pre-registration (PDF and LaTeX source), the monitor script that runs on the device, the fixed analysis script, the synthetic-data validation script with its results and figure, and the README. First data point: job db9qap9gv2cc73e5tufg, 2026-10-17T16:42:19Z, T1 = 162.9 +/- 7.9 us.
Public pre-registration (N47Lab method: criteria written BEFORE the data, not negotiable afterwards) of a search for a response of the PASM (Phase-Anchored State Multiplexing) phase-imprint observable to the lunisolar harmonic tidal field on a superconducting quantum processor. Hypothesis: if the phase imprint is a property of the substrate sensitive to external gravitational stimuli, the PASM mutual information must modulate coherently with the harmonic tidal potential (constituents M2, S2, N2, K1, O1, Mf, Mm). If the imprint is insensitive to the environment, the MI spectrum is flat at tidal frequencies. No intermediate result modifies this hypothesis. Foundation (ANALOGICAL motivation, not proof): atomic clocks respond to the lunisolar tidal field (Qin & Cheng, Astron. J. 158, 262 (2019), DOI 10.3847/1538-3881/abc06f): the tidal field is a real, modeled, measurable signal on precision quantum systems. The direct channel (qubit frequency) is ~11 orders of magnitude below device noise: the analogy does NOT extend to that channel. The tested channel is the temporal statistical modulation of the PASM observable (shared MI), never evaluated in the literature (verification 31/08/2026): neither tested, nor discarded, nor considered - documentary silence, not a verdict. Method: session >= 30 days, one point every 30-60 minutes with rotated schedules (decorrelation from the solar day), fixed backend (ibm_marrakesh), 2 replicates per point, MI with timestamp, theoretical tidal reference from ephemerides (no ocean tides). Analysis: Lomb-Scargle periodogram on MI(t), significance vs null (permutations + FDR). Decision criteria (written first, not negotiable after data): C1 Presence: spectral power at M2 frequency significant vs null; C2 Discrimination: M2 and S2 resolved as distinct lines; C3 Ratio: M2/S2 power compatible with 2.17 within +/-50%; C4 Negative control: lines at NON-tidal frequencies must be absent (if present -> instrumental artifact, outcome NOT VALID). Pre-registered decision: >= 2 of 3 criteria (C1-C3) + clean C4 -> TIDAL RESPONSE; otherwise -> NOT DETECTED (environmental negative control, useful and publishable result). The test has value in both outcomes. Declared limits: hunt, not guarantee; 'NOT DETECTED' = non-detection at the given sensitivity (power, not absence); thermal drift and daily calibrations monitored and decorrelated. Context note (NOT a criterion): optional post-data coherence check - cross-correlation of MI(t) with public atomic-clock phase series (common M2 harmonic). It does NOT enter the pre-registered decision: criteria C1-C4 are the only ones. No modification to the criteria after session start, except formal ex-ante amendment. Related: MatterMemory PASM data V2 (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22134568), pasm-experiments (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21830151), research-timeline (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21855315).
Amendment 5 (2026-10-09), deposited before any S2 data. The registered question, estimand, test, seeds (1000-1079), shots (2,000), backend and qubit rules and 600 s ceiling are unchanged. What changes is how sampler calls become IBM jobs: one job per call (960 jobs, about 2,900 billed seconds) cannot fit the ceiling because of per-job billing, so seeds run in two blocks of 40 and every round of a block is one multi-pub job (12 jobs, about 540 s expected). Both arms of a seed share each job; the resulting shared-job exposure is accepted, with the primary test unchanged and per-block estimates reported as a secondary diagnostic. There is no statistical stopping and no interim analysis. Author decisions (shots, blocks, exposure) were made on 2026-10-09. Files: S2_AMENDMENT_5.md, AMENDMENT_5_MANIFEST.json (hashes of the implementation snapshot, commit 3332e893, and of the documents) and rqc-s2-amendment5-5fc50b0c.zip (code, documents and tests at commit 5fc50b0c). The original pre-registration and its frozen tooling are included unchanged. Not approved for execution: a run requires a recorded approval bound to the exact run payload. Pre-registration, deposited before any hardware job. On one IBM Heron backend (alphabetical-first rule; lowest-CZ-error 8-qubit path), with depth, two-qubit gate count, shots and session equal, does feedback-driven local search over single-qubit angles raise the fresh-re-measured, circuit-normalized XEB of the selected circuit compared with random search, at equal output concentration? Primary estimand: β0 of d = β0 + β1·Δc (one-sided, α = 0.05); 80 fresh seeds (1000–1079); 10-minute QPU ceiling. Simulation (S1) on an ibm_fez noise model and on Google's Willow noise model disagreed (β0 +0.010 and −0.003, both intervals include 0); the test is powered for effects of about 0.012 or larger and a null does not rule out smaller ones. Code frozen at github.com/osiris-dnalang/osiris-cli commit 86e3a3f4 (archive included).
Proposal to the BlueQubit Quantum Flywheel open call (2026). Track 2 (breaking quantum advantage claims) with a Track-1 hardware component and a Track-3-adjacent seed. Aim 1 — execute the author's own hash-verified K₈ τ-sweep pre-registration (10.5281/zenodo.17918774, never run as written) exactly as specified on three IBM Heron backends under one pre-declared backend amendment; publish the outcome either way. Aim 2 — adversarial classical re-analysis of the author's 156-qubit / 10⁶-shot and 1,430-circuit "entropy suppression" datasets (10.5281/zenodo.19656600, 10.5281/zenodo.19505907) with coverage-adjusted estimators and tensor-network reproduction. Aim 3 — pre-registered hardware test of whether an auditable rule-evolving controller (organism_sim / bridge, 10.5281/zenodo.22862567) helps evolutionary dynamical-decoupling search under real calibration drift; four arms, binding criterion stated in PREREGISTRATION.md before any job. Includes PREREGISTRATION.md (binding criteria committed before submission of any hardware job), prepared form answers, and the supporting audits of the author's 60 prior records (HONEST_ASSESSMENT, FLYWHEEL_ASSESSMENT, PUBLICATIONS index). The archive is git archive of tag v1.0.0.
Two registered experiments with the QITE equilibrium law on the IBM Heron processor ibm_marrakesh, one day apart in nothing but the place where the law runs: outside the processor on a microcontroller board, and inside one shot in the processor's own feed-forward. Each experiment has its own registration, hashed before its first registered job, its own frozen scripts, complete raw data, verdict and write-up; the two archives in this record are independent of each other. QITE Hold (zenodo_qite_hold_20260923.zip, SHA-256 97853e20d86c146c16d6011191e9c038dddc743dfd5392476993187654f6e1d3; write-up custodia_paper_v1.pdf; working name Custodia). A microcontroller board (ESP32-C3) holds one pair of numbers per qubit for 144 qubits and turns each pair into a rotation angle. Every tick, one circuit of 144 single-qubit rotations is measured 4096 times; the fraction of ones per qubit goes to the board, the board updates its numbers by its fixed law and returns the angles of the next circuit; it never reads the processor's calibration. A registered programme of eight blocks ran over 280 ticks and 290 jobs: square waves, a hold, a staircase, a checkerboard of 18 zones up and 18 down, two state shocks written into the board, two disturbances written into the circuits, and a comparison with an open-loop reference of frozen angles. Of the seven binding lines, six were run and held; the seventh (drift against the open-loop reference) could not be run because the device did not drift by the registered minimum. The square waves came back with a gain of 0.231 of the commanded swing (the law: 0.25), the checkerboard put 98.5 % of (tick, zone) pairs on the commanded side, the disturbances were rejected to 0.557 and 0.539 of their open-loop size (the law: 4/7). A first registration (v1.0) ended at tick 130 through a design flaw of the host and is included in full. Registration SHA-256 1de82ab12a53c1da349196e8ef07851e6b2f176efc6bd1ca6ba14cacd1f7d54b. QITE In-Shot (zenodo_qite_inshot_20260923.zip, SHA-256 a087f88a95f17c6f8023d5ff40aff35901b5e3e87db531dcd76728511f7ae944; write-up qite_inshot_paper_v1.pdf). On each of 54 qubits, twenty rounds of a measurement followed by a rotation conditioned on that measurement, with angles that set the target level and the memory g; the records of a qubit form a two-state Markov chain whose second eigenvalue is 1 - g. The lines test that eigenvalue, not the level: the autocorrelations of the records for g = 0.3, 0.6 and 1.0 were +0.607, +0.366 and +0.046, the two memories in the ratio 1.657 (the law: 1.75); the relaxation from |0> came back at 0.690 and 0.446 per round (the law: 0.70 and 0.40, lowered by T1 during a round); a step of the target proceeded at 0.658 per round and, with g = 1, completed in one round; a kick of the state was followed by a return to within 0.012 of the unkicked hold; over the same twenty rounds an open-loop state lost 0.451 while the closed loop held within 0.006; 98 % of the qubits with a clean read-out showed their own rate within the registered band. All seven binding lines held; 17 jobs. The size is what the service's compiler accepted on the day (144, 72 and 64 qubits failed with an internal compiler error; every attempt is recorded with its job id). Registration SHA-256 51933de4196bfdd7998e6a5305f7576bb7d35ac137e8b6ce0109965372b4fe5c. Nothing here is a claim of quantum advantage: the observables are classical bits and the circuits contain no two-qubit gate. The claim of both experiments is one of control: a fixed law, registered in advance, holding a public quantum processor at commanded levels with the numbers the law says, once from a board over minutes and once inside the coherence time of the qubits. The board's firmware and the serial link layer are not part of the record; both are identified by their SHA-256 in the registration of QITE Hold. Licence: CC BY 4.0.
A preregistered Ramsey test (v4.1, job d94hi4lgc6cc73ff4cc0, ibm_fez, July 2026) of Quantum Resonance Theory's coherence-enhancement prediction (Anson 2024, DOI https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21263717) returned a QRT-consistent result: G_A = +2.87%, 95% CI [+2.35%, +3.46%], at the theory-designated ωr = 10 MHz with R0 = 10⁻³ rad. Per that registration's own terms, the result is treated as an artifact until it survives escalation. This study executes the highest-information single-session adjudication available within remaining hardware quota, exploiting two facts: (1) a genuine drive-coupled effect must scale with drive amplitude, while calibration-floor and noise-spectrum artifacts at milliradian angles do not — so a 10× amplitude arm converts a marginal effect into a decisively resolvable one; (2) the packed six-qubit layout carries six conditions per circuit, so amplitude scaling, second-device replication at original amplitude, neighbor peak structure, drive-phase randomization, and an undriven reference all execute in the same 24 circuits. The primary decision rests on the amplitude arm alone; all other vectors are declared secondary and descriptive. The backend is required in code to differ from ibm_fez (the v4.1 device). The result will be published regardless of outcome.
TSR-Q-1 presents a preregistered and falsifiable experimental protocol designed to test for structured late-time coherence residuals in superconducting transmon qubits. The protocol does not treat generic recoherence, non-exponential decay, or non-Markovian behavior as evidence for the proposed framework, since such phenomena may arise from conventional open-system mechanisms. Instead, it targets a specific normalized temporal scaling law, tₙ/T₂ = nᵏ, with the preregistered theoretical value k* = 1.4706, corresponding to the first two target locations t₂/T₂ = 2.7714 and t₃/T₂ = 5.0310. If the associated amplitude-scaling hypothesis is retained, the predicted ratio is A₃/A₂ ≈ 0.551. The accompanying computational validation package develops the analysis pipeline through five stages: preliminary signal injection, blind null testing, blind injection-recovery, multi-qubit global-k inference, and sensitivity mapping. The synthetic null models include stretched-exponential decay, 1/f^α correlated noise, random-telegraph/TLS-like contributions, slow drift, white noise, and device-to-device variability. These simulations validate the detectability, specificity, and sensitivity of the proposed analysis procedure under the tested synthetic noise families. They do not constitute experimental evidence for the existence of the predicted physical effect. The next stage is a preregistered hardware implementation using superconducting qubits, with device-specific null calibration, blind analysis, systematic controls, held-out replication, and, ultimately, independent experimental replication.