Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper presents a formal method for synthesizing minimal sufficient observation contracts using SAT/MaxSAT encodings to determine necessary attributes in finite state models. The research demonstrates that while exhaustive enumeration becomes infeasible at scale, logical synthesis solvers can efficiently identify cost-optimal or minimum-cardinality attribute sets without relying on AI inference.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Compiling Sufficient Governance Context from Declared Losses and Reachable States: Exact Observation-Contract Synthesis with Cardinality and Cost Objectives

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2609.26016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We call the object this paper derives and certifies a minimal sufficient governance context: given a finite reachable-state model, a deterministic declared verdict, and candidate observable attributes, we compute sufficient observation sets, distinguish attributes that are individually indispensable from contracts that are jointly sufficient, and select among sufficient contracts under a cardinality or declared-cost objective. An observation contract is a set of candidate attributes whose values determine the declared verdict on every reachable state; an authority contract is one selected under an objective and bound to a gate schema. We synthesize every inclusion-minimal sufficient contract where exhaustive enumeration is affordable, and a minimum-cardinality or minimum-cost contract by SAT/MaxSAT encoding otherwise, checking sufficiency directly. On a constructed code/cloud domain, the individually-indispensable core is not sufficient as an observation contract and two distinct reducts exist; a preregistered cost model separates them exactly. On a second, larger, constructed domain, the same pattern recurs, but that domain's cost model does not separate the alternatives: a fully explained cost tie, reported as found. We measure discernibility-family scaling where exhaustive enumeration is confirmed infeasible within a registered timeout, while SAT/MaxSAT synthesis solves in well under a second; MaxSAT showed no measured cardinality advantage over plain SAT. AuthorityBench compares four baselines across three domains; the declared-only baseline is not exactly sufficient on any. Every selected contract is checked for sufficiency, with a counterexample on failure and a check summary, not a portable certificate, on success -- the compiler-focused scope of a two-scope table; an independently specified end-to-end case study is registered follow-up work, not claimed here.

Abstract:We call the object this paper derives and certifies a minimal sufficient governance context: given a finite reachable-state model, a deterministic declared verdict, and candidate observable attributes, we compute sufficient observation sets, distinguish attributes that are individually indispensable from contracts that are jointly sufficient, and select among sufficient contracts under a cardinality or declared-cost objective. An observation contract is a set of candidate attributes whose values determine the declared verdict on every reachable state; an authority contract is one selected under an objective and bound to a gate schema. We synthesize every inclusion-minimal sufficient contract where exhaustive enumeration is affordable, and a minimum-cardinality or minimum-cost contract by SAT/MaxSAT encoding otherwise, checking sufficiency directly. On a constructed code/cloud domain, the individually-indispensable core is not sufficient as an observation contract and two distinct reducts exist; a preregistered cost model separates them exactly. On a second, larger, constructed domain, the same pattern recurs, but that domain's cost model does not separate the alternatives: a fully explained cost tie, reported as found. We measure discernibility-family scaling where exhaustive enumeration is confirmed infeasible within a registered timeout, while SAT/MaxSAT synthesis solves in well under a second; MaxSAT showed no measured cardinality advantage over plain SAT. AuthorityBench compares four baselines across three domains; the declared-only baseline is not exactly sufficient on any. Every selected contract is checked for sufficiency, with a counterexample on failure and a check summary, not a portable certificate, on success -- the compiler-focused scope of a two-scope table; an independently specified end-to-end case study is registered follow-up work, not claimed here.

Code, data, preregistration tags, review record, and independent reproduction (repository issue #3): this https URL. Artifact DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22884173

Software Engineering (cs.SE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO)

arXiv:2609.26016 [cs.SE]

(or arXiv:2609.26016v1 [cs.SE] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26016 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 303 words

Related coverage