Local Level Lab

Airborne measurements. Open methods.

Full-history training and prediction feasibility

Question

Can earlier position observations make a later prediction usefully narrow over a recording-length history, without discarding calibration directions?

This is a generated-data development test. It uses no aircraft observations, protected ESA outcomes or optimizer starts. It cannot establish aircraft error coverage or qualify a physical model merely by containing its generated truth.

Fixed calculation

Finite allowance

Work Per case Six-case maximum
Native value/Jacobian queries 12 72
Conservatively charged native packet visits 1,152,000 6,912,000
Source bounds 6 36
Logical bound steps (nine full streams per bound) 5,184,000 31,104,000
Training-conditioning LP proposals 18 108
Exact support checks 66 396

Each bound additionally reserves its full 96,000-packet source, derivative, point and direct streams before execution; unused reservations remain charged. Reserve one reference, one physical proof, two conditioning proofs and one post-prediction truth audit per case. All auxiliary reservations are journaled.

Use two workers, one numerical thread each, for two total threads. Freeze the runtime/source/input environment and use disk scratch. Based on the measured 50-second costs, expect roughly 6–8 wall hours, with a finite 14-hour cooperative study ceiling and two hours per bound. These limits stop new work cooperatively; they do not authorize process termination, retries or enlargement.

Retain failed/unfinished cases, original charged identities and every earlier study. Each query has its own bound; no unqualified multi-time bound reuse. The small staged controls and duration adapter must pass before preparation. Packaging checks sealed evidence only and never repeats numerical work.

Interpretation

Even a complete pass qualifies only this stated recording-length, fixed-error generated test at the declared future endpoint. It does not certify every later epoch, combined stochastic IMU/GPS errors, independent physical truth or a whole-program floating-point enclosure. Those V01 requirements remain open. Failure is evidence about this method; it is not permission to narrow physical bounds, discard directions, retry identities or begin V02 observed fits.

Roadmap · Error assumptions