When Can Depth Replace Precision? A Resource Theory of Quantized Neural Computation

When can additional low-bit residual computation replace missing numerical precision for a fixed input-output map? We model a quantized residual system over a fixed horizon as a pure schedule selecting fields from a declared low-bit operation library, and use relaxed controls to characterize its infinite-depth limit. The distance from the target to the closed relaxed reachable set is the exact structural floor: no increase in depth can remove it for that library. Pure schedules approach the relaxed class at rate $O(D^{-1})$ under bounded-variation time dependence and $O(D^{-\vartheta}+D^{-1})$ under Holder dependence of exponent $\vartheta$. Execution arithmetic can reverse this conclusion: full-state write-back introduces a $Dρ_z$ penalty and can freeze residual updates, whereas increment error feedback replaces this growth by a bounded carry term and obeys an exact common-lattice conservation law. A fixed-teacher converse makes this rate sharp: for coherent depth-$L$ first-order high-precision comparators, accuracy matching requires $D=Θ(L)$. Learned codebooks add a metadata resource, while state-dependent routing introduces hybrid event conditions. Verified primal and dual bounds yield feasible, impossible, or unresolved decisions before training. Companion software implements the workflow, and Lean 4 machine-checks the exact discrete core. Depth replaces precision only relative to a declared library, horizon, execution semantics, and routing model.

VeriBound: PAC-Bayesian Generalization Bounds for Process Reward Models Trained with Formal Verification Tools

Process Reward Models (PRMs) provide step-level verification for Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning, yet their training data acquisition remains a bottleneck: human annotation is costly and Monte Carlo roll-out estimates are noisy. A recent approach, FOVER, trains PRMs on step-level error labels automatically annotated by formal verification tools such as Z3 and Isabelle, and empirically observes cross-task generalization from symbolic tasks to diverse reasoning benchmarks. However, this generalization phenomenon lacks any theoretical explanation, and no formal bounds exist on the generalization error, sample complexity, convergence rate, or downstream Best-of-K performance of such PRMs. We propose VeriBound, a theoretical framework that provides PAC-Bayesian generalization bounds for PRMs trained with formal verification tools. We establish four main results: (i) a PAC-Bayesian generalization bound that relates the empirical verification error on formal-verification-annotated training data to the expected error on unseen reasoning tasks, with the bound depending on the formal verification accuracy and the divergence between training and test task distributions; (ii) a sample complexity result showing that $O(d \log(d/δ) / ε^2)$ formal-verification-annotated examples suffice to achieve generalization error $ε$ with probability $1-δ$, where $d$ is the complexity of the PRM hypothesis class; (iii) a convergence analysis proving that PRM training with formal verification labels converges at a linear rate under $L$-smoothness and bounded variance conditions; and (iv) an error propagation bound that relates step-level verification error to Best-of-K performance degradation.

Identifiability Without Gaussianity: Symbolic World Models and Near-Infinite Temporal Consistency

Klindt, LeCun, and Balestriero (arXiv:2605.26379) proved that Joint-Embedding Predictive Architectures (JEPAs) achieve linear identifiability, the linear recovery of the world's true latent variables, if and only if the world's latent dynamics follow a Gaussian, stationary process. This Gaussian boundary implies a fundamental limit on temporal consistency: for any non-Gaussian physical system, the representation error of a statistical World Model grows monotonically with time. We prove that this limit is an artifact of the statistical alignment mechanism, not a property of World Models in general. We introduce the Physics-Grounded Symbolic Architecture (PGSA) and prove three results: (1) a PGSA achieves exact linear identifiability for all physical regimes, regardless of the latent distribution; (2) the per-step error of a PGSA is bounded by numerical precision alone; and (3) as a direct consequence, a PGSA maintains temporal consistency for an unbounded number of transitions, a property we term near-infinite temporal consistency. We further prove that statistical World Models cannot achieve this property for any non-Gaussian system, regardless of model capacity or the volume of training data. The algebraic cores of four of the theorems are formalized in Lean 4 with Mathlib4 v4.31.0 (zero sorry placeholders); the Klindt et al. converse is taken as an external premise. The contrast establishes that symbolic grounding in the causal generator of the world's dynamics is the sufficient condition and, in non-Gaussian regimes, the only condition for near-infinite temporal consistency.