A planned re-analysis of the published dataset of Iqbal et al. (Communications Physics 7, 205 (2024); data at Zenodo record 10406111, CC BY 4.0). The plan tests one narrow question: whether the measured second Renyi entropies of two block sizes in that dataset (2x2 blocks, boundary count 8; 2x3 blocks, boundary count 10) are related by a single constant times the boundary count, plus a correction of 0.25 ln 2 derived in advance from the system's exact theory. The constant is fitted once, on the smaller blocks, and either also fits the larger blocks within the frozen band or the single-constant form fails for this instance. The strongest wording any outcome may carry is: the pattern, in miniature, in one published instance. The full frozen plan — quantities, reduction order, bands, verdict zones, preconditions, disclosures, and exclusions — is in the registration. The dataset has been public since 2023 and the authors' published values were read in full during formulation; the registration fixes the filing order (plan written and committed first, registration second, computation last) and does not claim the analysis is blind.
A planned re-analysis of the published dataset of Iqbal et al. (Communications Physics 7, 205 (2024); data at Zenodo record 10406111, CC BY 4.0). The plan tests one narrow question: whether the measured second Renyi entropies of two block sizes in that dataset (2x2 blocks, boundary count 8; 2x3 blocks, boundary count 10) are related by a single constant times the boundary count, plus a correction of 0.25 ln 2 derived in advance from the system's exact theory. The constant is fitted once, on the smaller blocks, and either also fits the larger blocks within the frozen band or the single-constant form fails for this instance. The strongest wording any outcome may carry is: the pattern, in miniature, in one published instance. The full frozen plan — quantities, reduction order, bands, verdict zones, preconditions, disclosures, and exclusions — is in the registration. The dataset has been public since 2023 and the authors' published values were read in full during formulation; the registration fixes the filing order (plan written and committed first, registration second, computation last) and does not claim the analysis is blind.
This project is the calibration stage of a study that tests, in the ground state of an engineered two-dimensional free-fermion system prepared on a cloud quantum processor, whether one constant per regime reads a region's particle-number variance off the number of lattice bonds its boundary crosses, once corrections computed exactly in advance are applied. The study runs in two registered stages. This stage, characterization, measures the instrument's noise floors on a frozen set of 30 region instances against their exact classical values; its measurements are calibration data, not evidence, and no claim is judged here. A second registration, filed after this stage's branch decision fixes the judged set, will register the claim, its frozen test, and its verdict rule before any judged measurement. No measurements have been taken yet: this registration is filed before the stage's runs, and its results will be reported against it, whatever they show.
Trapped ion quantum hardware demonstration of energy calculations using a multireference unitary coupled cluster ansatz: application to the BeH2 insertion problem
Version 2: pre-registration addendum for Phase D Outcome of the registered gate (G0) The G0 gate failed for every dataset, window family and null. No twin built from independent error mechanisms with circuit-local supports reproduces the bulk of the window-count distributions in the public data from Google Willow, Google Sycamore or Rigetti. For larger codes the twin cannot even be simulated. As the protocol requires, hypotheses H1–H3 are therefore not tested. This version adds pre-registration addendum 1. It fixes the analyses run instead, before either touches the test halves: • Model-free certificate (T3), on the test halves. It covers every registered configuration that has a circuit (the Google archives and Rigetti D6e). Windows are whole-patch windows of 1 and of 5 rounds, separated by one unused round, and the disjointness of their fault-location sets is checked from each circuit. Each stratum (archive, code family, code distance, window family) gets a premise curve ε_lo(k) on the grid k = c·j, j = 1–16, with Bonferroni correction at family-wise α = 0.05.• Threshold values for the certificate. ε* = 7.4 × 10⁻⁴ (Fowler, PRL 109, 180502, 2012) is the primary value; 2.73 × 10⁻⁵ (Aliferis, Gottesman and Preskill, QIC 6, 97, 2006) is a sensitivity check. Certificates against ε* are computed for surface-code strata only. Repetition-code, colour-code and stability strata get premise curves only.• Bursts. The primary analysis uses all windows; a secondary one excludes the windows flagged by the frozen burst classifier. B1/B2 event rates are reported descriptively.• Cat-qubit case study (exploratory). The model-based premise meter is applied to the AWS cat-qubit (D4) distance-3 configurations whose twin was simulable in G0. It reports R(k) intervals and k_cert, with the H1 reading (consistent if R_hi ≤ 3 for all k ≤ k_cert). It is labelled exploratory because D4's own G0 verdict is a fail. Status of the data when version 2 was created G0, which uses only the bulk bins, has run on the test halves. Its stored histograms include tail bins, but no tail statistic has been computed or examined. Both new analyses were dry-run on fit halves as pipeline checks. One choice was made after that dry run, and it is recorded in the addendum: ε* certificates were limited to surface-code strata, and strata were split by code family. The dry run had shown repetition-code and stability strata crossing ε* at k = c, i.e. at their base error rate, where Fowler's surface-code theorem does not apply. The model-based certification horizon is not computed, because it needs a twin tail. Files added in version 2 • phaseD_addendum.json: the machine-readable addendum. SHA-256: a458bcb40aa474d94a882a563a38a1a152d7bfb4404df9299f99fb020ab78834• ADDENDUM.md: the readable version of the addendum.• qpremise_code_phaseD_ade59b0.zip: the code that will run. The addendum's code_sha256 (794122ae1557c009664127e1c2e6b109781d5a71efcc566bc637b991c0403ab6) can be recomputed from it as the SHA-256 over the files matching qpremise/**/*.py, phaseD/scripts/*.py and phaseC/scripts/run_g0.py, taken in path order: each file's relative path, then its bytes with LF line endings.• SHA256SUMS_addendum.txt: checksums of the three files above. The version 1 files are unchanged. The original registration text follows. ──────────────────────────── Version 1 registration (2026-10-01) What this registers The analysis protocol of the premise meter. It tests whether public quantum-error-correction syndrome data agree with an independent-noise "twin" fitted to the same data. It also measures how far each dataset can certify the local-stochastic premise of the threshold theorem. Every analysis choice is fixed in frozen_protocol.json:• configuration eligibility, and the pre-registered subset in g0_selection.json;• the interleaved fit/test split;• the window families;• twin construction: candidate mechanisms from each circuit, an exact parity-moment fit, and a signed quasi-probability simulation with local weights;• the G0 gate decision rule;• the burst classifiers B1 and B2 with their validation targets;• the excess-tail-ratio interval and the certification-horizon conditions;• the model-free certificate's window rule. qpremise_code_at_freeze_79dbf14.zip holds the analysis code at the freeze. The protocol's code_sha256 can be recomputed from it: the SHA-256 over every qpremise/**/*.py file in path order, each file's relative path followed by its bytes with LF line endings. Hypotheses analysed after this registration (on test halves only) H1. After removing windows flagged by the frozen burst classifier, the excess tail ratio R(k) = P_obs(K ≥ k) / P_twin(K ≥ k) has an upper 95% confidence bound ≤ 3 for all k ≤ k_cert. Failure: a lower bound > 3 that replicates on the held-out half. H2. Including burst windows, R(k) > 10 for k ≥ k_b in at least one dataset, and a burst-mixture model fitted to the flagged windows predicts the published repetition-code error floor within a factor of 10. H3. The empirical horizon (power ≥ 0.8 at α = 0.05 against a factor-5 excess) agrees with the exact binomial computation within ±1. At least one dataset certifies k ≥ 10 in whole-patch windows. These are evaluated only on (dataset, window family) pairs that pass the G0 gate under both the stationary (N1) and drift-aware (N5) twins. The model-free certificate (T3) does not depend on the twin. Its threshold ε* is fixed before any certificate is computed. Timing and what had been seen Frozen 2026-10-01 17:31 IST (git commit 79dbf14). Before the freeze, only fit halves had been analysed. The G0 gate (bulk of the window-count distributions only; decision rule frozen) began on the test halves minutes after the freeze. When this record was created, no tail statistic (R(k), H1–H3, burst rates, certificates) had been computed from the test halves, and their tail bins had not been examined. The planned cloud-hardware contrast experiment (H4, H5) is not part of this registration and will be registered separately before any hardware run. Full details are in PREREGISTRATION.md. Protocol SHA-256: 5f7458cfdbe0e203fd9e2bf5d579703509c8374bae53096c37f8f1530540707a
Paper 44 of this sequence closed its U3 construction program at readiness: two budgeted experimental designs — a photonic tapped-switch probe and a circuit-QED recorded-versus-unrecorded differential — and an execution map, a pre-registered decision tree assigning every future measured outcome its pre-committed consequence, with scoring left "by whoever holds the data." Paper 47 then closed the theory-side debt ledger, leaving the executed-measurement route as the corpus's only live route to a framework-forced world-side shift. What 44 did not freeze is the layer between data-in-hand and leaf-adjudicated: shot schemas, exclusion policy, blinding order, stopping rule, claim authority. That unfrozen layer is where a post-data analysis authority could still sit — the researcher degrees of freedom and forking paths of the methodological literature, answered in precision physics by blind analysis and pre-registration. This paper — the forty-eighth in the sequence, opening panel of its Execution Program (Papers 48-50) — freezes exactly that layer, before any laboratory exists, as the template of a handover package executable and adjudicable by strangers: every analysis decision the package will ever need is either frozen here or typed as a named pre-data slot behind a failable acceptance gate, so that once a design-specific instance is accepted, no one — including the author, who operates no laboratory and has made that fact load-bearing — retains a seat from which a future outcome could be re-interpreted. Four document-level layers are delivered. Record layer: field-level shot schemas for both designs, with every field and every raw source typed into an audit or scoring partition; an add-only extension rule; ledger, provenance, and dataset-role conventions; and an exclusion grammar under which every excluded run is a first-class recorded event and every exclusion predicate is outcome-unread by construction. Statistics layer: the estimators, the null-carving formula, a leaf-decision normal form (frozen statistics, thresholds, tie rules per leaf), and the stopping rule, inherited verbatim from Papers 43/44 with the arithmetic re-checked; and a four-stage blinding architecture ending in a scoring stage at which everything is readable and nothing is choosable. Authority layer: a claim-authority table over the map's seven leaves and four post-data speaking roles — the data holder scores; the series designer holds no scoring cell; the decisive leaf is licensed only to the data holder's own successor paper — plus the handover normal form H with a seven-condition acceptance gate, a data-existence certificate with a public deposit obligation, a mock-data challenge typed as non-evidence, and pre-committed unlock conditions for the reserved data papers 49-D/50-D. Verdict layer: a six-check closure audit (leaf coverage; arithmetic consistency; partition admissibility; blinding soundness; exclusion soundness; authority totality), each check mechanical against the delivered artifacts, with the pre-committed either-way verdict ProtocolStatus in {closed, gapped} scoring template closure — an executable package exists per design only as an accepted H-instance. The audit is run and every check passes: closed at the template layer, quarantine register empty. Papers 49 (tap-channel exclusion protocol) and 50 (recorded-unrecorded differential protocol) are unlocked to instantiate H per design; only the unlock-conditioned data papers 49-D/50-D will ever score a datum. The retired authority is the Global Statistician — post-data analytic discretion personified: its authority reading is retired by construction (no analysis decision has a post-data seat left to occupy, the per-design property conferred by each accepted H-instance), its innocence reading by the imported methodological record, and its substantive face — one uniquely correct inference framework — is declined, not refuted. Nothing world-side moves: no datum is scored, no band or floor shifts, the feasibility verdicts stay 44's, U3Status is restated not re-scored; if no laboratory ever executes, the program rests where 44 left it — undecided, with an implementable and now administrable discriminant — a complete record, not a failure.