Skip to content
#edge computing Open access

Exact Permutation Moments for Walsh Interaction-Order Energies: A Projector Specialization of Quadratic-Form Randomization Theory

Sep 2026 · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Abstract

WHAT THIS PACKAGE DOES This reproducibility package accompanies the methods manuscript "Exact Permutation Moments for Walsh Interaction-Order Energies: A Projector Specialization of Quadratic-Form Randomization Theory" (J600, Roshankumar Chandaliya, QDL project). It provides the complete open-source implementation, exhaustive verification, computational benchmarks, and environment metadata needed to independently reproduce every numerical claim in the manuscript. WHY IT MATTERS Exact permutation moments of quadratic forms are classical, but their specialization to Walsh interaction-order projectors on the Boolean cube has not, to our knowledge, been packaged as a ready-to-use computational toolkit. That gap matters in practice: practitioners who want null distributions for Walsh-degree energies typically rely on large Monte Carlo permutation runs, which are slow and noisy. This package shows, with public code and reproducible benchmarks, that the same first- and second-order null moments can be computed analytically in microseconds — a speedup of roughly four to five orders of magnitude over Monte Carlo, with agreement to machine precision. WHAT THE MANUSCRIPT ESTABLISHES (BRIEFLY) For a centered finite population assigned to the N = 2^n vertices of the Boolean cube, the degree-k interaction-order energy is: E_k = sum_{|A|=k} g_hat_pi(A)^2 By specializing established quadratic-form randomization theory to orthogonal Walsh projectors, the manuscript derives compact exact formulas for the permutation mean, variance, and cross-level covariance. The formulas are verified exhaustively at N = 4 (24 permutations) and N = 8 (40,320 permutations), and benchmarked up to n = 18. WHAT IS INSIDE THE PACKAGE - Reference implementation of the exact null-moment formulas (exact_null_moments).- Two independent energy evaluators: dense Fast Walsh-Hadamard Transform (FWHT) and sparse Hamming/Krawtchouk aggregation, cross-checked against each other.- Monte Carlo benchmark using 100,000 uniform value permutations, for direct runtime comparison.- Exhaustive permutation verification at N = 4 (all 24 permutations) and N = 8 (all 40,320 permutations).- Edge-case verification: exact B = 0 case (g = [1, 1, 1, -3]), and a proof-by-grid-check that no valid centered N = 4 field admits B < 0.- Timing distributions as CSV files, reporting median, interquartile range, minimum, and maximum for each tested size.- Environment metadata: Python 3.13.5, NumPy 2.3.5, Intel Xeon Platinum 8573C, 5-vCPU container, kernel 6.18.44.- Publication-ready LaTeX benchmark table matching Table 3 of the manuscript.- SHA256 integrity manifest covering all scripts, CSVs, and the LaTeX table.- README with step-by-step reproduction instructions and a fixed random seed (20260917). HEADLINE COMPUTATIONAL RESULT On the recorded environment, the exact formula is approximately 10^4 to 10^5 times faster than a 100,000-permutation Monte Carlo estimate of the same first- and second-order moments, with numerical agreement to machine precision. Dense and sparse evaluators agree to a maximum relative error below 2.5 x 10^-16 across n = 4 through 18. Absolute timings are hardware-specific; all scripts and seeds are fixed so the benchmarks can be rerun on other machines. INTENDED AUDIENCE Statisticians, applied probabilists, and computational scientists working with permutation inference, Boolean Fourier analysis, high-order contingency tables, or log-linear interaction decompositions. Researchers who need fast, exact null moments for Walsh-degree energies can use this package directly; readers who want the underlying theorem should consult the companion manuscript. SCOPE AND HONEST BOUNDARIES This package is a computational and reproducibility artifact. It does not introduce new physical claims, does not imply causality or retrocausality, and does not establish any microscopic Hamiltonian. The theorem is a static finite-sample exchangeability result; it is not a temporal, interventional, or physical law. Timing results are machine- and implementation-specific and are reported as benchmarks, not as universal performance claims. The full permutation distribution and tail probabilities are outside the scope of first- and second-moment formulas and remain an open problem for this statistic. CITATION If you use this package, please cite both the companion manuscript and this record. Companion manuscript J600: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22808605. LICENSE Source code — MIT. Data and benchmark outputs — CC BY 4.0. See the LICENSE file in the package for the full text.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Jun 2008

The impact of agile practices on communication in software development

The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.

M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al. · 401 citations · ⚡48
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.