PolyLabs Research
PolyLabs Research

Finding the laws of simple worlds, and proving them

We study cellular automata on finite lattices: square, hexagonal and triangular. Each claim goes through a loop of machine checks: a simulation, a test registered in advance, and a proof in Lean. More and more of the proposing and proving is done by AI agents, and machines judge their work too.

period, exact…
the law says
The parity rule B1357/S1357, grown from one live cell on an n × n torus. Your browser computes its exact period, and the law our loop found and registered predicts it.
The model

A loop in which nobody marks their own work

Finding a pattern in data is easy. Knowing whether it is real is hard: with enough rules, sizes and laws to try, chance supplies patterns too. So every stage of our loop hands its output to a check that the stage cannot change:

  1. Experiment. LatticeLife runs the automata and says what each number means, including when it is only a bound.
  2. Law. Kepler fits closed-form laws with error bars, and ranks them against their rivals.
  3. Registered test. A law's predictions at untested sizes are written to a hash-chained ledger and pushed to GitHub before anyone computes those sizes.
  4. Proof. What survives is proved in Lean 4. A theorem counts only if it builds and rests on Lean's three standard axioms.
  5. Agents. AI agents, given a problem card and the proof library, propose the mechanism and write the proof. An automatic judge decides whether it counts.

The model, in detail, includes the real ledger of one study, to check yourself, and a record of every step an agent took.

Registered tests, misses included

predictions written before the runs

Three of these tests refuted what we registered. We count that as the method working: each miss pointed at something real, and the corrected claim was then registered and tested again.

ClaimTested atOutcome
Square parity law, P(n) = 2v(2sord(m) − 1)45 sizes by simulation, then all 198 sizes from 3 to 200 exactlyheld at all its rival refuted at all 10 sizes where they differ
Hexagon parity law, first form70 sizesrefuted at 74, 148 and 190, by a factor of 3
Hexagon parity law, corrected100 new sizes, 202 to 400held at all then proved for every even n
Triangle parity laws154 sizesheld at all
Kepler finds the hexagon law itself8 registered expectations8 of 8
B2/S34 settling time grows like log Lhexagon tori up to L = 1024, 100 soups eachheld the power law rejected (p = 10−9)
Kepler's laws for 42 linear rules, 38 never studied1,930 new (rule, size) pairsheld every rule with a law kept one
Rules that do not split reach the full bound113 predictions on 116 new rulesrefuted 7 failed, which revealed cubes and dilations
The refined statement, as a fixed procedure11,358 predictions, 344 new rulesrefuted 43 failed (0.4%), which revealed the twisted power
The laws the agents proved, at sizes nobody had computed15, 40 and 20 predictions in three pilots75 of 75
The fourth agent's mechanism for m = 37, at a held-out grid registered before it started180 claims at 29 held-out sizes180 of 180
The fifth agent's mechanism for m = 25, at a held-out grid registered before it started414 claims at 43 held-out sizes, on the atlas and the square family414 of 414
Our expectation that the cube confinements left in the square family are chanceall 32,767 rules at 14 sizes, registered before the runrefuted at 6: twisted pairs at four, and 16 rules at m = 37 nobody could then explain
The same expectation, with both pilots' mechanisms countedall 32,767 rules at 17 new sizes, 77 to 125refuted at 95, 101 and 111, by exactly the nine rules the sixth agent explained, where it predicted them; nothing else
Findings

What the loop has found

proved, in part

The parity laws

Exact period laws for the parity rule on all three lattices. The hexagon's first law was refuted, and the corrected one is proved for every even n. The square rule escapes the shortfalls of rule 90 and the hexagon shares them exactly; a brief literature search found neither fact.

three rounds, refined twice

The linear atlas

Periods of 502 linear rules built from neighbour shells. A rule reaches its field's full bound unless something confines its eigenvalues. Four mechanisms do, and three of them were found because a registered prediction failed.

replicated

Settling time

A random soup under B2/S34 settles in a time that grows like the logarithm of the torus size, replicated to L = 1024. Across eight random rules on four lattices the fluctuations share one shape and one ratio, the Gumbel values of extreme-value theory.

6 of 6 accepted

Agents that prove

Six fresh agents, each given only a problem card and the Lean library, proved theorems the library lacked, each passing the judge in its first round. The third found its law from data first. The fourth answered a question nobody had answered; the fifth answered part of a harder one; the sixth answered the question the fifth's test raised.

answered by an agent

The cubes at m = 37

Six rules that none of the known mechanisms touches had every eigenvalue a cube at m = 37, far beyond chance. In the fourth pilot an agent found why, on a question nobody had answered, and proved it in Lean. Its condition made 633 claims at 94 sizes, 180 of them at held-out sizes registered before it started, and none was false.

Lean 4, standard axioms

The proof library

The bridge from periods to eigenvalues, the bound, the reduction from even sizes to odd, every confinement mechanism, and the agents' three proofs, all checked by Lean against mathlib.