DELTA III  measurement paperFirst-pass signature

A within-layer first-pass signature in the remaining_K 64–95 layer

An observational follow-up. Descriptive analysis only — no mechanism, causality, or proof is claimed.

A companion study (Paper 2) localized a difference signal between observed accelerated Collatz trajectories and a structureless null model on a remaining_K chain, and identified its cleanest sequence-level carrier as the A signature at 64–95 → 32–63. This paper does not introduce a new claim. It re-reads the same sampled universe to ask where in a trajectory the A signature appears, and what distinguishes the trajectories that realize it from the near-neighbours that do not.

We report four descriptive findings. (1) A is not an entry signature: among trajectories that ever satisfy it, A coincides exactly with the first 64–95 → 32–63 pass in every observed case. (2) The dominant non-A pass that shares A's local k=1 / 1,1,1 face differs only by entry route (an inflow analogue); after the pass, the two follow an almost identical coarse downstream path. (3) Among same-route (START_IN_LAYER) passes, what separates A from its non-A siblings is not the formation of the all-1 context but its maintenance up to the pass. (4) A small set of trajectories form the all-1 context and then lose it before passing; in this sample the loss is a localized interruption of the k=1 run. We give an external-benchmark overlay against Rozier–Terracol Appendix C in an appendix. Throughout we use only observational language.

Contents
  1. Scope and stance
  2. Dataset and definitions
  3. The boundary into 64–95
  4. First-pass structure inside 64–95
  5. A_start and A_inflow
  6. Other_start
  7. Formation and maintenance of the all-1 context
  8. Lost111 micro-cases
  9. Interpretation boundaries
  10. Conclusion
  11. Appendix A — Rozier–Terracol overlay
  12. Appendix B — Output file index

01  Scope and stanceFirst-pass signature

1. Scope and stance

The object of study is the same difference signal used in Paper 2, written informally actual − iid: the contrast between observed accelerated Collatz trajectories ("actual") and a surrogate ("iid word") in which the per-step valuation word is resampled independently from a fixed marginal. Paper 2 established that this signal is sharply localized on the remaining_K coordinate and that its cleanest carrier is the A signature. The present paper takes the A signature as given and asks only descriptive questions about its placement and its near-neighbourhood.

Stance We restrict ourselves to observational language: we observe, we find, is concentrated in, is carried by, coincides with, is consistent with. We do not write because, mechanism, or proof. Low-support cells are flagged and treated as candidates, not claims.

02  Dataset and definitionsFirst-pass signature

2. Dataset and definitions

The analysis universe is the same sampled ensemble of long accelerated Collatz words as the companion studies, in the scanner mode original_n_strict. All counts below are reproduced from that mode unless stated otherwise. The ensemble is sampled, not exhaustively enumerated (see §9).

2.1 Coordinate

For an odd integer trajectory under the accelerated Collatz map, let xt+1 = (3xt+1)/2kt with kt = v2(3xt+1), and let w = (k0, …, kτ−1) be the valuation word. With total mass Kτ = Σ kt, the reported coordinate is the remaining mass before step t,

\[ R_t = K_\tau - \sum_{i Bins are half-open dyadic intervals; the two used throughout are 64–95 (64 ≤ R < 96) and 32–63 (32 ≤ R < 64). A transition A → B occurs at position t when Rt is in A and Rt+1 is in B.

2.2 Local descriptors

Reading note — easy to misread START_IN_LAYER means the word starts inside the relevant remaining_K layer at that occurrence. It does not mean "first arrival into the layer." The alternative route considered here is INFLOW_FROM_96-127, i.e. entering 64–95 from the band above.

2.3 Signature hierarchy

We keep the original A signature unchanged and call it A_start. We name a near-neighbour and an umbrella, but the umbrella is descriptive only.

A_all1_pass        64-95 -> 32-63,  transition_k=1,  pre_k_window_3 = 1,1,1
 ├─ A_start        + entry_route = START_IN_LAYER        (= the original A signature)
 └─ A_inflow       + entry_route = INFLOW_FROM_96-127    (near-A; different route)

Other_start        START_IN_LAYER first pass that is NOT A_start

Where the text says "A" without qualification, it means A_start. A_inflow is treated as a separate near-A pass face, not as a relabelling of A_start.


03  The boundary into 64–95First-pass signature

3. The boundary into 64–95

Of the 550 trajectories in the universe, twelve never enter the 64–95 layer at all (group G0); the remaining 538 do enter it (G1). Every trajectory in G1 eventually performs a 64–95 → 32–63 pass.

Table 1. Entry partition (original_n_strict).
GroupCountDescription
G012never enters 64–95
G1538enters 64–95; all eventually pass to 32–63
Total550sampled universe

The twelve G0 trajectories — 7, 9, 18, 19, 25, 91, 121, 242, 243, 484, 485, 486 — are sometimes tempting to read as "near-A failures." The data does not support that reading. None reaches 64–95, so each scores 0/4 on the A conditions for the trivial reason that the source band is never occupied. Under the requested signature clustering they are heterogeneous (every full profile is a singleton); they collapse to eight odd cores. We therefore describe them as boundary non-entrants / low-K cases, set aside from the A neighbourhood rather than placed at its edge.


04  First-pass structureFirst-pass signature

4. First-pass structure inside 64–95

A does not appear at the first 64–95 event. The first event inside the layer is almost always a 64–95 → 64–95 stay, and no trajectory's first entry event is A-like. Instead, among the 365 trajectories that satisfy A anywhere, A coincides with the first 64–95 → 32–63 pass in all 365 cases (first_A_index = first_pass_index, with none before and none after). In this scanner, A is therefore a within-layer first-pass signature, not an entry signature.

Waiting time inside the layer (events from first entry to first pass) is informative but non-monotone. The A-hit rate rises into a peak and then falls:

Table 2. A-hit rate by first-pass waiting time (all G1). pre111 = share with all-1 pre-window before pass.
Wait bucketCountA-hit ratemedian k=1 runpre111 share
wait_050.0000.00.000
wait_190.0001.00.000
wait_2180.0561.50.056
wait_3_5650.7383.00.738
wait_6_101450.9454.00.952
wait_11_plus2960.6054.00.990

Waiting time alone does not describe A cleanly: the longest-wait stratum has the highest pre111 share yet a lower A-hit rate than the mid-wait stratum. Local features carry additional separation. Two thresholds are nearly absorbing in this sample: every A-hit row has a k=1 run of length ≥ 3 and has pre111 before the pass (outside-threshold A-hit rate 0.000 in both cases), and first-pass START_IN_LAYER alone lifts the A-hit rate to 0.847. We read A as a within-layer first-pass face that depends on the wait together with the local all-1 context, not on the wait by itself.


05  A_start and A_inflowFirst-pass signature

5. A_start and A_inflow

Classifying each G1 trajectory by its first-pass face gives four groups that partition the 538:

Table 3. First-pass face classes (G1 = 538).
ClassCountFirst-pass face
A_start365START_IN_LAYER / k=1 / pre111
A_inflow104INFLOW_FROM_96-127 / k=1 / pre111
Other_start66START_IN_LAYER, not A_start
Other_inflow3INFLOW_FROM_96-127, not A_inflow

A_start and A_inflow share the same local face and differ only by entry route. After the first pass their coarse downstream paths are nearly identical: in both classes the top next-3 and next-5 transition sequences are entirely 32–63 → 32–63 stays and cover the whole class. The median time to the next boundary 32–63 → 16–31 is 23 events for both, and the median time below 16 is 30 for both. The next boundary even wears the same face in both classes:

32-63 -> 16-31    INFLOW_FROM_64-95 / transition_k=3 / pre_k_window_3 = 1,1,3+

The two are not identical on the integer side: A_inflow skews toward larger and longer trajectories (higher mean/median log2(n), word length, and total_K). The descriptive summary is that A_inflow is the same all-1 pass face reached by a different upstream route, not a separate downstream destiny. We keep it under the A_all1_pass umbrella as a near-A face, distinct from A_start by route and provenance.


06  Other_startFirst-pass signature

6. Other_start

Restricting to START_IN_LAYER first passes (431 rows = 365 A_start + 66 Other_start) isolates the cleanest comparison: same entry route, A versus not-A. The 66 Other_start rows are not random residue. The dominant deformation keeps the route and k=1 but breaks the all-1 pre-window:

Table 4. Leading Other_start first-pass signatures (transition_k | pre_k_window_3).
SignatureCount
1 | 3+,1,128
5 | 2,3+,3+7
3 | 2,2,3+5
1 | 3+,14
1 | 2,3+,14
remaining cells low-count; see startface_step2_other_start_signature_counts.csv

All 66 fail the pass-time all-1 context (none has pre111, the length-5 suffix 1,1,1, or 1,1,1,1 in local_window_4 at the pass); 20 also fail transition_k=1. Yet downstream they behave much like A_start: their top next-5 sequence is again all 32–63 → 32–63 stays, and the median time to 32–63 → 16–31 is 23, identical to A_start. Other_start is therefore best treated as a separate START_IN_LAYER pass-face family — a dominant near-A deformation plus a low-count heterogeneous tail — that shares A's downstream corridor but not its pass-time face. The separator lives at the pass, in the local all-1 context.


07  Formation and maintenanceFirst-pass signature

7. Formation and maintenance of the all-1 context

Section 6 locates the separator at the pass; this section follows the all-1 context across the interval from first 64–95 entry to first pass, tracking the first appearance of 1, 11, 111, and 1111 and whether each survives to the pass.

A_start (365)all reach 111, all maintain it to the pass
A_inflow (104)all reach 111, all maintain it to the pass
Other_start (66)58 never reach 111; 8 reach but lose it; 0 maintain

The distinction is not the formation of the all-1 context but its maintenance: A-realizing trajectories maintain 111 to the pass without exception, while every Other_start trajectory either never develops 111 or develops it and then loses it. The maintained interval is short: the median distance from 111 formation to the pass is one event, so the observation is better phrased as "the all-1 context is intact at the pass" than "the all-1 context is held for a long time."

Observation Among START_IN_LAYER trajectories, all A_start trajectories maintain the all-1 context until the first pass, whereas Other_start trajectories either never develop the all-1 context or lose it before the pass.

08  Lost111 micro-casesFirst-pass signature

8. Lost111 micro-cases

The eight Other_start trajectories that form 111 and then lose it are the only group with an explicit "made it, then lost it" story, so we read them at the event level and pair each with a matched A_start trajectory (matched on odd core, log2(n), total_K, first-pass wait, and word length; mean differences are small — e.g. |log2(n)| 0.013, |total_K| 0.000).

Table 5. How 111 breaks in the eight Lost111 cases.
BreakCount
111 → 1,1,3+5
111 → 1,1,23

Every break is the same kind of event: the final 1 is replaced by a larger k (a 2 or a 3+), interrupting the k=1 run. But the break is not at the doorstep: the median distance from break to pass is 6 events, so these are not last-instant slips. Structurally, only 1/8 would have satisfied A_start had 111 been maintained; the other seven also miss the pass-time transition_k=1. We therefore decline to call all eight "near-A failures" and instead describe them as a 111-maintenance-failure micro-subset of Other_start. The representative trajectory cards (e.g. odd cores 639, 2273, 1515) are in lost111_step7_trajectory_cards.md.


09  Interpretation boundariesFirst-pass signature

9. Interpretation boundaries


10  ConclusionFirst-pass signature

10. Conclusion

The picture that the observations support, stated descriptively:

enters 64-95 | v first pass 64-95 -> 32-63 | +-- A_all1_pass (transition_k=1, pre111) | | | +-- A_start START_IN_LAYER 365 (= the original A signature) | +-- A_inflow INFLOW_FROM_96-127 104 (near-A; same downstream corridor) | +-- Other_start START_IN_LAYER non-A 66 | +-- never forms 111 58 +-- forms 111, loses it (2/3+) 8 (Lost111 micro-subset)

A  External overlayFirst-pass signature

Appendix A — Rozier–Terracol overlay

As an external benchmark only, we overlay the Rozier–Terracol Appendix C acyclic paradoxical starting integers (arXiv:2502.00948) onto the remaining_K coordinate and the A signature. Their notion of "paradoxical" — overshoot of the initial value past the stopping time — is defined differently from the mass-deficit / conditional-excess configuration studied here, so this is a correspondence check, not a claim that the two notions coincide.

From 593 Appendix C occurrences (550 distinct starting integers), the full A signature is hit by 365/550 = 0.664 under original_n_strict and 377/550 = 0.685 under odd_core mapping; the broader 64–95 → 32–63 corridor is hit by ~0.97. A robustness recheck (extraction audit, mapping-mode comparison, strict-event definitions, baselines, negative controls) returns the verdict partially robust: the strict A-event share stays high under both mappings, while random same-range negative controls land far lower (full-A shares around 0.17–0.21).

Table A1. Full A-signature share vs negative controls (original_n_strict, counts over 550).
SetFull-A shareNote
Rozier–Terracol App. C0.664benchmark
random same-count0.218negative control
random same-size range0.205negative control
consecutive from min0.204negative control
odd random same range0.175negative control

Two caveats are recorded rather than hidden. First, the overlap depends on mapping Rozier–Terracol integers through their odd cores into the odd-accelerated coordinate, while ordinary stopping coordinates are computed on the original integer. Second, the most strongly enriched matched baselines (e.g. residue/prefix matching) are the supported ones; log2-matched baselines have no actual support because the benchmark integers sit below the sampled actual universe. A non-hit taxonomy (which benchmark integers miss strict A, and why) is given in rozier_nonhit_classification.md; most non-hits still traverse the broad corridor but miss strict A by route or local k-context. This material supports an appendix-level benchmark note only.


B  FilesFirst-pass signature

Appendix B — Output file index

Primary reports underlying each section. Per-trajectory CSVs are referenced inline above.

SectionReport
§3 boundaryno_64_95_to_32_63_report.md, entry_64_95_boundary_report.md
§4 first-pass / waitjoint_wait_feature_report.md
§5 A_start vs A_inflowpostpass_Astart_Ainflow_report.md
§6 Other_startstartface_Astart_Otherstart_report.md
§7 all-1 formationall1_formation_report.md
§8 Lost111lost111_microcase_report.md, lost111_step7_trajectory_cards.md
§6 carrier (Paper 2)paradoxical_64_95_deep_dive.md, paradoxical_sequence_report.md
App. A overlayrozier_overlay_report.md, rozier_overlay_recheck_report.md, rozier_A_occurrence_neighborhood_report.md, rozier_nonhit_classification.md

Observational follow-up paper. No mechanism, causality, or proof is claimed.