Datasets:
Adding the output of SymbolicRegression.jl.
Browse files
New symbolic regression equation/hall_of_fame.csv
ADDED
|
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
+
version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
|
| 2 |
+
oid sha256:583c78df9f4ae9e859f59b9b54901b7fcc256495d6941e813e4aa5f78619aaf4
|
| 3 |
+
size 487
|
New symbolic regression equation/saaq_1_5_delta_q_adaptation_law.md
ADDED
|
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
+
# SAAQ 1.5 Delta-Q Adaptation Law
|
| 2 |
+
|
| 3 |
+
## Proposed Update Law
|
| 4 |
+
|
| 5 |
+
The new symbolic-regression result can be expressed in its raw discovered form as:
|
| 6 |
+
|
| 7 |
+
```latex
|
| 8 |
+
\[
|
| 9 |
+
\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_target}
|
| 10 |
+
\approx
|
| 11 |
+
\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{avg\_pop\_firing\_rate\_hz}}\cdot 0.05727633160985141\right)
|
| 12 |
+
-
|
| 13 |
+
\left(\frac{\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_prev}}{-2.015263764843582}\right)
|
| 14 |
+
\]
|
| 15 |
+
```
|
| 16 |
+
|
| 17 |
+
A simplified equivalent approximation is:
|
| 18 |
+
|
| 19 |
+
```latex
|
| 20 |
+
\[
|
| 21 |
+
\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_target}
|
| 22 |
+
\approx
|
| 23 |
+
0.0573\,\sqrt{\mathrm{avg\_pop\_firing\_rate\_hz}}
|
| 24 |
+
+
|
| 25 |
+
0.4962\,\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_prev}
|
| 26 |
+
\]
|
| 27 |
+
```
|
| 28 |
+
|
| 29 |
+
## Variable Breakdown
|
| 30 |
+
|
| 31 |
+
- **$\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_target}$**: The new target quantization adjustment for the current update step.
|
| 32 |
+
- **$\mathrm{avg\_pop\_firing\_rate\_hz}$**: The average population firing rate, measured in hertz, representing current global spike activity pressure.
|
| 33 |
+
- **$\mathrm{saaq\_delta\_q\_prev}$**: The previous delta-q value carried over from the last update step.
|
| 34 |
+
- **$\sqrt{\mathrm{avg\_pop\_firing\_rate\_hz}}$**: A sublinear activity term that compresses large increases in firing pressure.
|
| 35 |
+
- **$0.05727633160985141$**: The discovered gain on the square-root firing-drive term.
|
| 36 |
+
- **$2.015263764843582$**: The denominator in the carryover term from the raw symbolic-regression expression.
|
| 37 |
+
- **$0.4962$**: The simplified carryover coefficient, indicating that roughly half of the previous delta-q state remains active in the next update.
|
| 38 |
+
|
| 39 |
+
## Plain-Language Interpretation
|
| 40 |
+
|
| 41 |
+
### 1. Square-root activity drive
|
| 42 |
+
The first term says that delta-q should increase as population firing increases, but not in a straight linear way. Because the firing term is under a square root, strong activity still matters, but its effect is compressed. That means the system responds to global spike pressure without letting very high firing rates explode the quantization update.
|
| 43 |
+
|
| 44 |
+
### 2. Half-memory carryover
|
| 45 |
+
The second term says that the new target delta-q does not start from zero at every step. Roughly half of the previous delta-q value is retained. This gives the adaptation law continuity over time instead of forcing the system to constantly re-estimate quantization pressure from scratch.
|
| 46 |
+
|
| 47 |
+
### 3. Leaky recurrence
|
| 48 |
+
Taken together, the equation behaves like a leaky recurrent controller:
|
| 49 |
+
|
| 50 |
+
- current firing activity pushes delta-q upward,
|
| 51 |
+
- previous delta-q state persists,
|
| 52 |
+
- but the carryover is less than 1.0, so the process does not simply accumulate forever.
|
| 53 |
+
|
| 54 |
+
That makes the law stable and interpretable. It acts more like a controlled adaptive process than a noisy feedthrough rule.
|
| 55 |
+
|
| 56 |
+
## Why It Matters
|
| 57 |
+
|
| 58 |
+
### Sublinear compression
|
| 59 |
+
The square-root term is important because it creates **sublinear compression**. If spike activity doubles, delta-q does not double with it. This is desirable for hardware-aware SNN quantization because it prevents aggressive overreaction during bursts of collective activity.
|
| 60 |
+
|
| 61 |
+
### Fatigue compatibility
|
| 62 |
+
This law is naturally compatible with fatigue-style dynamics. Higher activity still raises the quantization target, but it does so in a way that is bounded and softened. That makes it a plausible companion to biologically inspired fatigue or resistance mechanisms instead of fighting them.
|
| 63 |
+
|
| 64 |
+
### Temporal inertia
|
| 65 |
+
The carryover term provides **temporal inertia**. Delta-q remembers where it was, which helps smooth fast oscillations and prevents quantization from thrashing between states. In practice, this makes the control signal easier to port into a native SNN runtime such as Spikenaut.
|
| 66 |
+
|
| 67 |
+
## Relationship to SAAQ 1.0
|
| 68 |
+
|
| 69 |
+
SAAQ 1.0 and SAAQ 1.5 can be framed as a two-layer control structure:
|
| 70 |
+
|
| 71 |
+
### SAAQ 1.0: voltage bounding
|
| 72 |
+
SAAQ 1.0 establishes the base stabilizer by bounding latent voltage with the L2-normalized voltage law:
|
| 73 |
+
|
| 74 |
+
```latex
|
| 75 |
+
\[
|
| 76 |
+
V_{\text{norm}} = \frac{V}{\sqrt{\sum V_i^2 + \epsilon}}
|
| 77 |
+
\]
|
| 78 |
+
```
|
| 79 |
+
|
| 80 |
+
This prevents raw voltage from collapsing the routing process into a single dominant path.
|
| 81 |
+
|
| 82 |
+
### SAAQ 1.5: quantization adaptation
|
| 83 |
+
SAAQ 1.5 operates one layer above that. Instead of directly bounding voltage, it adapts the quantization target over time based on:
|
| 84 |
+
|
| 85 |
+
- current global activity pressure,
|
| 86 |
+
- previous quantization state.
|
| 87 |
+
|
| 88 |
+
So the relationship is:
|
| 89 |
+
|
| 90 |
+
- **SAAQ 1.0** controls **voltage magnitude**.
|
| 91 |
+
- **SAAQ 1.5** controls **how quantization pressure evolves over time**.
|
| 92 |
+
|
| 93 |
+
Put more simply, SAAQ 1.0 keeps the system from blowing up, while SAAQ 1.5 tells the system how fast and how far to adapt once it is stabilized.
|
| 94 |
+
|
| 95 |
+
## Scope and Caveat
|
| 96 |
+
|
| 97 |
+
This equation should be treated as a **global baseline adaptation law**, not necessarily the final universal law for every routing regime.
|
| 98 |
+
|
| 99 |
+
That matters because your telemetry already suggests **piecewise routing behavior** across different prompt families and basin structures. So this formula is best understood as:
|
| 100 |
+
|
| 101 |
+
- a strong global controller,
|
| 102 |
+
- a clean first portable law,
|
| 103 |
+
- and a good candidate for transfer into Spikenaut.
|
| 104 |
+
|
| 105 |
+
But it may not be the final word. Later work may show that different routing basins need slightly different local adaptation laws.
|
| 106 |
+
|
| 107 |
+
That does not weaken the discovery. It clarifies the role of SAAQ 1.5:
|
| 108 |
+
|
| 109 |
+
> a stable, interpretable global delta-q controller that can serve as the baseline adaptation law before basin-conditioned refinements are introduced.
|
| 110 |
+
|
| 111 |
+
## Portability to Spikenaut
|
| 112 |
+
|
| 113 |
+
One of the strongest qualities of this equation is that it is small, interpretable, and runtime-friendly. It uses:
|
| 114 |
+
|
| 115 |
+
- a square root,
|
| 116 |
+
- a scalar gain,
|
| 117 |
+
- and a linear carryover term.
|
| 118 |
+
|
| 119 |
+
That makes it far easier to port into a native SNN such as Spikenaut than a deeply nested symbolic expression with many fragile operations. Even if later symbolic-regression passes discover more accurate local laws, this version is likely to remain valuable as the first practical adaptation controller for deployment and ablation testing.
|