Paper detail

Coherent Comparison as Information Cost: A Cost-First Ledger Framework for Discrete Dynamics

We develop an information-theoretic framework for discrete dynamics grounded in a comparison-cost functional on ratios. Given two quantities compared via their ratio \(x=a/b\), we assign a cost \(F(x)\) measuring deviation from equilibrium (\(x=1\)). Requiring coherent composition under multiplicative chaining imposes a d'Alembert functional equation; together with normalization (\(F(1)=0\)) and quadratic calibration at unity, this yields a unique reciprocal cost functional (proved in a companion paper): \[ J(x) = \tfrac{1}{2}\bigl(x + x^{-1}\bigr) - 1. \] This cost exhibits reciprocity \(J(x)=J(x^{-1})\), vanishes only at \(x=1\), and diverges at boundary regimes \(x\to 0^+\) and \(x\to\infty\), excluding ``nothingness'' configurations. Using \(J\) as input, we introduce a discrete ledger as a minimal lossless encoding of recognition events on directed graphs. Under deterministic update semantics and minimality (no intra-tick ordering metadata), we derive atomic ticks (at most one event per tick). Explicit structural assumptions (conservation, no sources/sinks, pairwise locality, quantization in \(δ\mathbb{Z}\)) force balanced double-entry postings and discrete ledger units. To obtain scalar potentials on graphs with cycles while retaining single-edge impulses per tick, we impose time-aggregated cycle closure (no-arbitrage/clearing over finite windows). Under this hypothesis, cycle closure is equivalent to path-independence, and the cleared cumulative flow admits a unique scalar potential on each connected component (up to additive constant), via a discrete Poincaré lemma. On hypercube graphs \(Q_d\), atomicity imposes a \(2^d\)-tick minimal period, with explicit Gray-code realization at \(d=3\). The framework connects ratio-based divergences, conservative graph flows, and discrete potential theory through a coherence-forced cost structure.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.